AAU Tournaments and peer-pressure to move the games along...

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

OK, my question is simple. Then what standards would you use if you say you do not use strict NFHS interpretations? The NCAA has the same exact interpretations as the NF (Guess where the NF got their standard from?) Even the NBA has similar philosophies when it comes to plays on the perimeter, the post is just a little different for a lot of reasons.

Peace

Can you even define "strict interpretations" on judgement calls? There are absolutes in rules and then there are rules that require judgement. You can't tell me that you judge illegal contact the same way for different levels of play. The non-HS leagues do many things different -- running clocks, different # of timeouts, no color restrictions on undershirts, etc. If the assignor for an AAU league makes it clear that they want to keep the games moving, I have no issue taking that into consideration just as I would if the assignor who tells us not to strictly enforce NFHS uniform rules that aren't safety related.

My whole point was that I personally don't see adapting my playcalling to the a non-HS environment as a big deal. Someone who tells me that they don't adapt their decision making to the level of play and type of game is either lying or not a good referee.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

Can you even define "strict interpretations" on judgement calls? There are absolutes in rules and then there are rules that require judgement.

10-1-4 in college is the same rule of 10-6-12 in NF.

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

You can't tell me that you judge illegal contact the same way for different levels of play. The non-HS leagues do many things different -- running clocks, different # of timeouts, no color restrictions on undershirts, etc.

I absolutely call the game the same way. I was not talking about obvious rules differences like if the 3 point line in college is different than high school that I would use that line in high school. Or I would call a block-charge call the same as if there is an RA in a high school game. But when the contact rules are the same, I would call it exactly the same way. If the action is not a foul in a college game, it is not a foul in a high school game. But many uniform rules in college and NF are practically the same and will be strictly enforced. That is often not even considered in games under AAU. Did a tournament in another state and no one was going around telling kids to roll up their shorts or take off those undershirts that did not match the jersey. Heck there were even officials that allowed taped ears because the kid had on earrings.

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

If the assignor for an AAU league makes it clear that they want to keep the games moving, I have no issue taking that into consideration just as I would if the assignor who tells us not to strictly enforce NFHS uniform rules that aren't safety related.

Well if there are rules for fouls, I am calling them. Because if we don't, then I am not doing my job and I would rather call the foul that is supported by rule than pass on something. The most games I work in AAU are associated with a camp and no where are we told to not call something because it is AAU or we are being evaluated for higher than high school.

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

My whole point was that I personally don't see adapting my playcalling to the a non-HS environment as a big deal. Someone who tells me that they don't adapt their decision making to the level of play and type of game is either lying or not a good referee.

Well I see basketball as basketball. It is the same basic game from grammar school to college and even pros. The difference is the ability of the players that can handle marginal contact differently. But if the illegal contact puts a player at a disadvantage, then it is a foul regardless of who is playing. And when I go to camps were are asked to call the game the same that I would if I was working a high school game even though the camp is for college basketball. If you are asking me to change something, then you do not understand the game IMO.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... there were even officials that allowed taped ears because the kid had on earrings.

While I'm not the most flexible guy when it comes to deviating from NFHS rules, I can be a little flexible in some non-scholastic situations. However, this is one line that I'm not about to cross because it involves a safety issue. If someone gets an earlobe ripped apart, this would be the time that a lawsuit (like what we've been discussing) could, and probably would, be filed, with the officials sitting on the wrong side of the courtroom with an expensive attorney looking at his watch figuring out billable hours. And I can guarantee that the tournament directors who allowed the earrings (and so instructed the officials) would not be the only names on the lawsuit, I'm pretty sure that the officials would be also named. Why can't the kid sue his stupid parents for stupidly allowing him to wear a stupid earring in a stupid basketball game, organized by stupid tournament directors, and officiated by stupid officials?

If a tournament director were to ask me, as an official, to allow a player to participate with an earring, he would have two choices, don't allow the player to participate, or, "So long, farewell, auf wiedersehen, adieu, au revoir, and goodbye".

[bucky]

I think AAU/AYBT/etc. ball depends on many, many factors and just isn't simply black/white. I have officiated summer ball for about 20 years and have encountered a vast spectrum of issues. I've officiated very small kids to plenty of now-in-the-NBA kids. At some tournaments, this same disparity was 3 courts from each other. Some directors allow officials to wear shorts whereby others require/demand full-length pants. Some are 2-man only while others are 3-man only. Some are really low-level and for fun while others have hundreds of college coaches drooling on the sideline. I think each game is case by case. For big boys, a lot is allowed. For the younger kids, less is allowed. The format usually is a big determining factor too. Some have running clock while others do not. Some have hired tables while others have parents working on a just-before-tip-voluntold basis. Some paid $15/game while others paid $40/game. Some provide 3 meals/day while others provide nothing. Just a huge blanket of differences from one tourney to the next. I will say this though, parents are always the number one negative about any tourney.

[ODog]

EVERYTHING bucky just said. Beautiful picture of the AAU landscape in a nutshell.

And I'm with HokiePaul regarding adapting playcalling to the level of game. Absolutely! Kids vs. adults, boys vs. girls, high school vs. AAU, etc. Anyone who calls all of those exactly the same is not anyone I would want to share a court with.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ODog

EVERYTHING bucky just said. Beautiful picture of the AAU landscape in a nutshell.

And I'm with HokiePaul regarding adapting playcalling to the level of game. Absolutely! Kids vs. adults, boys vs. girls, high school vs. AAU, etc. Anyone who calls all of those exactly the same is not anyone I would want to share a court with.

Then we are not working together.

Because when I have called the game differently as you suggest or there are those that cannot call the game that is in front of them, they often do not get hired. Again was at a camp this weekend and not a single clinician said anything about what level we were calling for a college evaluation. If there was a foul, it was a foul. Nobody said a thing about, "In college, you would do differently." And that has been my experience in going to these kinds of camps. Because the rules for those things are practically identical. You might have things like backcourt, goaltending, basket interference or even where you put the ball in play be different, but everything involving contact is the same. I do not think of the level I work, I just do my job. Worked very well for me for over 20 years. Actually, this position was said by a former mentor of mine that was an NBA official. He said to call the games the exact same too.

Peace

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Then we are not working together.

Because when I have called the game differently as you suggest or there are those that cannot call the game that is in front of them, they often do not get hired. Again was at a camp this weekend and not a single clinician said anything about what level we were calling for a college evaluation. If there was a foul, it was a foul. Nobody said a thing about, "In college, you would do differently." And that has been my experience in going to these kinds of camps. Because the rules for those things are practically identical. You might have things like backcourt, goaltending, basket interference or even where you put the ball in play be different, but everything involving contact is the same. I do not think of the level I work, I just do my job. Worked very well for me for over 20 years. Actually, this position was said by a former mentor of mine that was an NBA official. He said to call the games the exact same too.

Peace

I think you're probably misinterpreting what was stated about adapting play calling to the level. Same goes with how you communicate with players and coaches. The rules on contact might be written the same, but they still require the official to judge a play and rule that contact as legal or not. The level of play and type of game does factor into that judgement call -- at least for me. No two plays are exactly the same. Contact that may be a ruled incidental in one situation may be ruled illegal at another based on numerous factors.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

I think you're probably misinterpreting what was stated about adapting play calling to the level. Same goes with how you communicate with players and coaches. The rules on contact might be written the same, but they still require the official to judge a play and rule that contact as legal or not. The level of play and type of game does factor into that judgement call -- at least for me. No two plays are exactly the same. Contact that may be a ruled incidental in one situation may be ruled illegal at another based on numerous factors.

Agree with Hokie in response to Jrut. Respectfully Jrut, I was always taught the opposite at college camps. I recall a D1 Supervisor, standing near a game I was working. They were HS players and kid went to the rack for a layup with some contact. I called a foul and sure enough, soon after the play, he came to me and said to pass on those at the college level. I am not basing everything on just that play as I have been told that and seen it be told to others many times throughout the years. I understand Jrut's point though. Taking the concept and calling all games with same consistency is an argument that certainly can be made. One wouldn't get much flack for doing that.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

I think you're probably misinterpreting what was stated about adapting play calling to the level. Same goes with how you communicate with players and coaches. The rules on contact might be written the same, but they still require the official to judge a play and rule that contact as legal or not. The level of play and type of game does factor into that judgement call -- at least for me. No two plays are exactly the same. Contact that may be a ruled incidental in one situation may be ruled illegal at another based on numerous factors.

You are right that no two plays are the same. But again that was not my point either. And it actually IMO gets easier to call when you get older players because their ability is much more defined. But again I do not go into a mindset, "This is a JV game so I need to use different judgment." Now if you do that is fine, but not my issue. That is probably the reason call a lot of girls games because the same idea of what is a foul to me in that game is the same it is in a boys game. That is often not accepted in girls games so I tend to stay away from them wanting a call every time there is contact. But I call a freshman game with the same idea of judgment that I would a Division 3 game. The difference obviously is that the Divison 3 player can likely handle a certain level of contact and keep playing, where a freshman might get rattled. But that could be the case in different Division 3 teams if they are not on the same level of skill.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bucky

Agree with Hokie in response to Jrut. Respectfully Jrut, I was always taught the opposite at college camps.

OK. It did not happen or such statement was stated this past weekend. The only reference to being a high school official was the mechanics that were used. That was it. Nothing about how we called the game or did not call the game. As a matter of fact, the emphasis on contact near the basket is the exact same thing we are taught at the high school level. Then again one of the same supervisors I work for at the high school level assigns games at the college level (actually that is most of the case where I live). We are never asked to call the game differently for a high school game. What we do got us hired or keeps us on staff.

Originally Posted by bucky

I recall a D1 Supervisor, standing near a game I was working. They were HS players and kid went to the rack for a layup with some contact. I called a foul and sure enough, soon after the play, he came to me and said to pass on those at the college level. I am not basing everything on just that play as I have been told that and seen it be told to others many times throughout the years. I understand Jrut's point though. Taking the concept and calling all games with same consistency is an argument that certainly can be made. One wouldn't get much flack for doing that.

I went to a college camp last year was the first time I can think of where there was both college players and high school (AAU) players in the same setting (they did not play each other BTW) We were not told at all to do anything different when officiating. If we called a foul on a drive in the AAU game, we were expected to call the same foul with the JUCO players. The JUCO players were clearly bigger and faster but the same concept on how we came to a judgment was the same. And that has been the case well over 10 years I have been attending D1 type camps and that camp was run by a D1 supervisor as well.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But again I do not go into a mindset, "This is a JV game so I need to use different judgment." ... girls games because the same idea of what is a foul to me in that game is the same it is in a boys game. That is often not accepted in girls games so I tend to stay away from them wanting a call every time there is contact ... call a freshman game with the same idea of judgment that I would a Division 3 game. The difference obviously is that the Division 3 player can likely handle a certain level of contact and keep playing, where a freshman might get rattled.

Like JRutledge, I never go into a game with a certain mindset regarding contact, rather, I try to see what the players can handle. Hopefully I can figure it out, and get on the same page with my partner, sooner rather than later.

Girls generally can't handle contact as well as boys, but some girls can, and some boys can't. Younger players generally can't handle contact as well as older players, but some younger players can, and some older players can't.

Watch the players (and listen to the coaches) for the first few minutes and see patterns develop, and then adjust to those patterns, but don't go into the game with any fully formed preconceived notions.

I always have problems going from a Thursday night girls varsity game to a Friday night boys varsity game (but, oddly, no problems with the reverse). After a few minutes I get it all figured out and then its easy peasy lemon squeezy for the remaining three and a half periods.