How would you handle this sitch?
 

A4 and B4 are competing to secure control of a rebound in the first quarter.
The ball goes OOB and from your vantage point it appeared as though it was last touched by A4, so you give the ball team B. But just as you are setting things back up for resumption of play, player B4 tells you "hey mister referee, to be honest sir, the ball was out off of me." Player A4 says nothing.
Would you ignore the "new information" transmitted by B4 and proceed as you first called it--giving the ball to team B? Or would you reverse your call, respect the honesty of B4, and give the ball to team A?
For the record in our game, we stuck with the original OOB call and gave the ball to team B.

Sometimes players "feel" as though they were the last to touch the basketball just as well or poorly as we "see" it. I always appreciate the honesty (it's rare), but I stick with what I saw (but not before peeking around hoping that a partner will come in with information).

Team B gets the ball.

Happened to me in the last month. I did not change my call, since I did not feel it would be proper to do so based on player information (whether it would benefit their team or not). Slippery slope - if you change this call, then you may be asked to change a call that WOULD benefit that player's team.

I actually had this in a college game this season. I didn't change my call though.

"Thank you, but we'll go with what I saw."

What's the level of play?
 

I've changed a call like this before.
It was a rec league game for adult men. Player A who I thought it went out on vehemently disagreed. Player B said he had hit it last. I switched it. Both teams were happy. I'm not gonna live or die on a call like that if I've potentially missed it.
Never had it happen in a "real" game.

I called it that way for a reason. And seeing all these out of bounds calls during the NCAA Tournament, half the time players have no idea who touched the ball or not. I would go with the way I saw the play. Otherwise, I would get help or go with a held ball.

Peace

Slippery Slope ...
 

I wouldn't change my call, but I would take an extra second to look over at my partner.

Agree. Not one of my favorite terms, especially when applied to politics, but it's appropriate in this situation.

Sometimes we may want to do this:

anybody in this thread that wouldn't change the call in that circumstance shouldn't be officiating, are you kidding me? to disrespect a player showing the character to make that admission? It's a bad example of lack of sportsmanship all the way around. You guys think you are infallible? Good lord, this is really ugly, you have to be kidding me. Instead of having a nice moment for all, including the crowd, your egos won't allow you to admit the possibility that you might be wrong.

Or the kid could be wrong.

I might be wrong on my call, but what I see is the only thing I can go on (besides possible information from a partner). Officiating is an human endeavor, open to error, but we can't officiate by taking admissions or by committee. Nothing at all to do with disrespect.

thedewed, didn't you say that you ref'ed D2? Would you change your call in a D2 game?

One could do this: Run to partner and tell him what kid said. Then return and change call giving deflection signal. Now, it appears as if partner gave you information when really it was the kid. Problem solved....sorta.

Slippery slope - indeed a dangerous term. How many of us have made/changed a call based on info from a player? Happens a lot and this isn't different. In D2 national championship near end of game, FT lane defender points to shooter's foot on line. Ref see him point, moves in closer, angles down, and calls violation after release. Or..player A1, stops his attack/dribble and says player B2 is hurt. Don't you go looking for B2 b/c player A1 gave you information? Or.. player A1 says to you that Team B has 7 players on the court. Don't you start counting Team B players? Or..A1 vehemently tells you that the foul was on A2, not A3 as you reported. Aren't you going to at least question yourself and get the correct player? Or.. how about B2 (#12) telling you that he fouled A1, not the reported B3 (#21), who wasn't even near the play? If you are the reporting official, aren't you going to correct it based on info from the player? Maybe not exactly the same case as the OP but, the slippery slope was mentioned.

Pepperidge Farm Remembers ...
 

"Hey mister referee, to be honest sir, the foul was on me (the worst player on my team on the court) not on my teammate (the best player on my team on the court, who, by the way, has four fouls)."

Anybody remember when players had to raise a hand when they were charged with a foul? The NFHS stopped that requirement in 1974.

This is misguided. Your whole premise is flawed, by assuming that the player is 100% correct. This is not about the egos of officials, or not recognizing good character in a player. It's about the correct way to adjuticate a play.

Nobody wants to hear your Fanboy nonsense. How about you throw on some stripes and you do it that way?

This isn't a site for you to run off on the mouth about what you think officiating should be. Do it yourself or keep your thoughts to yourself.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Hell no that dude is not a ref. He's a Kansas Jayhawk fan who comes in here to run his mouth.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

There was even a sportmanship commercial with this exact situation that ran for years. It didn't end with the official saying "sorry, even though you were directly involved and it is against your team's interest to provide that information, and a remarkable example of conscientiousness and sportmanship in a world dominated by the opposite of those traits, I know better than you."

Seriously, everyone on the other side must be joking. c'mon, take a step back. you are not seeing the forest for the trees here. embarrassing.

And you are not seeing the biosphere for the forest. It sets a dangerous precedent to change a call based on what a player says. We have all read sad stories of a firefighter who is found guilty of arson, in his hope to be a hero. You don't think a kid is capable of a fib on an OOB play, so he can later be praised for his honesty and sportsmanship? And has been stated here, the kid may think the ball was out on him, but that might not be 100% accurate.

The bottom line is that we can't rely on what a kid says to change a call!

"a sportmanship commercial"
 

Well, that's an authoritative source of guidance. You can cite that to the other coach when he/she wants an explanation for why you changed your call.

It is so basic to officiating--for good or for bad--that you can only make calls based on what you see, not on what others might say.

Embarrassing? To whom? A fanboy?

Crystal Ball ???
 

Maybe it did, maybe it didn't. We never find out how it ended.

https://youtu.be/vOhn6eO3Wds

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/vOhn6eO3Wds" frameborder="0" allow="autoplay; encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

One Person Game ...
 

In thirty-seven years, I believe that I've worked two, or three, one person games. In the pregame coaches/captains meeting, I tell everybody that I may have to ask for help (from players, and from coaches (on their sideline)), or I may make mistakes, on out of bounds calls. If both teams can agree on a call, I'll go with their call, otherwise I'm going to the possession arrow. Good help. Very few arrow calls.

Sportmanship ...
 

Of course the offending team can just intentionally turn over the ball on the ensuing possession, that's the way they do it in soccer. That's one reason why they call it "The Beautiful Game".

It's Part Of The Game ...
 

Agree. Officials can make mistakes, so can players.

One big difference between players and officials, officials are the only totally, 100%, unbiased people in the gym, that's why we're there.

Everybody else in the gym, even the table, and the police officer in the corner, has a dog in the fight.

Everybody else.

Officials are on the court to be the only unbiased arbiters of the game. Officials are not concerned with who wins, or loses, but only fairness, and safety. Everyone else in that gym cares about winning, and therefore, cannot look at the game objectively. Players commit fouls, and violations; officials view those infractions, judge the action, and then apply the rules of the game to what they had observed. The rules then determine the penalty.

I do not give a damn why you think me or anyone should be officiating. Players are not always right in their assessment of many things. They think they know rules they do not even understand. They think they did not do things they thought they actually did (usually because they do not understand the actual rules involves as stated before) and they do not know who touched every ball or when a line was touched. I love how players will tell you they did not step on the line, but they clearly stepped on the line and many people saw that situation.

I do not call plays that I do not often see. Is it possible I am wrong? Yep, but it is not likely because the player knows either. And if that bothers you, then you will have to worry about it because I or anyone here likely does not work for your sorry behind in the first place. ;)

Peace

Wtf does a commercial have to do with anything?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

It was a public service announcement advocating for or coming from a specific church.

Peace

Apparently, it's a great way to learn how to referee. Rules books, officiating manuals, clinics--so old school!

Let's Be Careful Out There (Sgt. Phil Esterhaus) ...
 

Watch it buddy. I believe that that's two times over the past week, or so. We all don't want to see what happens if it's mentioned a third time. I guarantee that it won t end well.

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=OIP.nRL...95&w=181&h=121

Let's Go To The Videotape ...
 

Already posted:

Thanks Billy, I already saw the posting. ;)

Peace

Esteemed Has A Nice Ring To It ...
 

I look for any excuse to keep my post numbers up to hold onto my "Esteemed Forum Member" status.

I don't know what the minimal post numbers are to be an "Esteemed Forum Member", so I don't want to take any chances falling below that threshold.

There clearly was no other viable reason. :rolleyes:

Peace

This isn't golf.

What Would Emily Post Do ???
 

Curling?