Halftime Questions

[Rich]

It goes without saying that I'd rather not call any marginal fouls.

But I especially don't want to call a fourth or fifth on anyone, especially an impact player who will not either have to play differently or will be out of the game if it's not an obvious, necessary foul.

I'd just rather know. A lot of top officials I've spoken with and have heard speak agree with me. Others don't. I'm just telling you where I sit on this.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

... especially an impact player.

Special players getting special treatment isn't just an NBA concept.

That's not my bag, it doesn't seem like the intent and purpose of the rules, but I understand how it accepted by many others.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Special players getting special treatment isn't just an NBA concept.

That's not my bag, it doesn't seem like the intent and purpose of the rules, but I understand how it accepted by many others.

It's not special treatment, it's acknowledgement that a shitty call on an impact player is a much bigger deal than on someone who pops in to give a guy a 2 minute blow in the second quarter.

I want to know who has 3 at all times. Impact player, non-impact player, anyone. I won't hesitate to call those fouls when they're there.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

... a shitty call on an impact player is a much bigger deal than on someone who pops in to give a guy a 2 minute blow in the second quarter.

It most certainly is, you'll get no argument from me.

Originally Posted by Rich

I won't hesitate to call those fouls when they're there.

And neither would I. Throughout the game, in regard to calling fouls, I try to be consistent with my partner, consistent with what has already been called in the game, consistent with my local board's philosophy on advantage/disadvantage, freedom of movement, late game strategic fouls, etc., and I try to maintain that consistency for thirty-two minutes.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Rich

It's not special treatment, it's acknowledgement that a shitty call on an impact player is a much bigger deal than on someone who pops in to give a guy a 2 minute blow in the second quarter.

Is it inconceivable that consciously trying to avoid a "shitty call" in this situation could lead to a shitty no call?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Is it inconceivable that consciously trying to avoid a "shitty call" in this situation could lead to a shitty no call?

Leads to increased concentration and certainty on my part.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Leads to increased concentration and certainty on my part.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I'll buy that. But for me I think that means I have a tendency to blow less whistles on anyone late in a close game, not just impact players. ("LET THE PLAYERS DECIDE THE GAME!!") Put me in the camp of never asking who has three or four fouls, but quite often we know anyway, whether we like it or not.

[bob jenkins]

I just like to know so we can properly administer the fifth foul instead of having the table buzz us back. Plus we can sometimes figure out the offense and better judge any contact if we know who they might be "attacking."

[UNIgiantslayers]

A Final Four official said this to me at camp this year and it resonated with me because I used to hate when guys would mention that:
If you get a cheap 3rd foul in the first half or a cheap 4th/5th in the second half on the best player on that team, rather than having the best player on the floor, you’ve now got the 6th best player on the floor. Does that improve the flow and quality of the basketball? That has reshaped my philosophy, and while I will go get it if it’s there, if it’s marginal or 50/50 as to whether it’s a foul or who the foul is on, I’m going to choose wisely in an effort to preserve the quality of basketball being played.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by UNIgiantslayers

A Final Four official said this to me at camp this year and it resonated with me because I used to hate when guys would mention that:
If you get a cheap 3rd foul in the first half or a cheap 4th/5th in the second half on the best player on that team, rather than having the best player on the floor, you’ve now got the 6th best player on the floor. Does that improve the flow and quality of the basketball? That has reshaped my philosophy, and while I will go get it if it’s there, if it’s marginal or 50/50 as to whether it’s a foul or who the foul is on, I’m going to choose wisely in an effort to preserve the quality of basketball being played.

Wow! Really? I find that rather absurd. The 6th best player is going to cause a big drop off in the flow and quality of the game? Virtually every game has stretches where play can get sloppy even with the best 5 players from each team in the game. Players 10-15 might certainly affect the flow and quality (but at that point the game has likely been decided) but the 6th player? I can't ever think of a time where I was even remotely concerned about the 6th player affecting the flow and quality of a game. I think sometimes we believe big-time officials are giving us nuggets when it's really only fools gold.