Reaching out of your area

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by SD Referee

Wow!!!!!!!! Some of you guys have to put up with some unbelievable crap from a power hunger assignor or association. I'm so glad we are truly treated as independent contractors here and don't have to anything other than high school........what we are licensed for. What an absolute joke to make officials do wreck ball.

While I don't like the idea of what they're doing, being an independent contractor doesn't mean you get to write the contract. It means you can take it or not.

If the person offering the job wants to package some number of games together in some way, they have that right as much as you have the right to take the entire job or not.

[ilyazhito]

Some associations do require rec ball (Board 134 requires members to work at least 1 weekend day of rec ball a month), but others ask constantly for officials to do rec assignments because they need contracts covered (Board 12, MBOA). Fortunately, there are associations that do not require rec ball, so I can work more games with those groups when I get a full varsity schedule. I might also request to limit my rec games in the other associations to varsity or up-and-coming partners, to maximize my enjoyment and the usefulness of these games.

I agree that rec ball is useless for officials' development, and even counterproductive, beyond a certain point in an official's career. The simplified, convenience mechanics used do not help officials working 2-person middle school and high school games, and the fact that rec games (except for some adult league games) use 2-person does not benefit officials who work 3-person games. Rec games may be useful for newer officials, to supplement middle school and subvarsity experience with additional game repetitions and situations, but I don't see a point for officials working those games other than to train younger/newer officials.

Officials who work rec games often develop bad habits that need to be un-learned for sanctioned scholastic games,such as ball-watching, needlessly calling outside one's primary area, not switching on fouls (or doing bump-and-run movements on violations), and not stopping the clock with the appropriate signal (or being aware of clock status in general). While some of these habits are understandable (young kids (up to 10U, maybe 12U) tend to converge around the ball in basketball and other sports), as most recreational games use a running clock (switching on fouls might waste limited playing time) that only stops for a limited set of circumstances (usually shooting fouls and timeouts), they have bad consequences for when the same officials do scholastic games (whether middle school or high school). Thus, officials need to be careful to be as situationally aware and use the same signals as in scholastic games, even when the signals may apparently be meaningless.

[ilyazhito]

I also had a play similar to the OP in a boys varsity game yesterday. While it was a different foul (illegal use of hands, for hitting the shooter on the arm), I made a similar call in a similar situation to the OP (I was Center calling across the lane, just as the OP was). KIPP (White, the home team) was playing Maya Angelou (Red), and the game was in the 2nd quarter, KIPP leading by ~10 points when a White player drove to the basket from Trail's side. Red 3 hit the White player on his arm as White started his shooting motion. Trail was out of position, so he did not make a call. I paused to see if Lead would make a call (the play was in his primary area), and when neither of the other officials made the call, I called the foul. After the play was over and the free throws were attempted, Red 3 admitted that I made the right call.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... illegal use of hands, for hitting the shooter on the hand ...

ilyazhito: I hope that you kept this in mind:

It is legal use of hands to accidentally hit the hand of the opponent when it is in contact with the ball. This includes holding, dribbling, passing, or even during a shot attempt. Striking a ball handler, or a shooter, on that player's hand (in contact with the ball) that is incidental to an attempt to play the ball is not a foul.

[ilyazhito]

That contact was not incidental to an attempt to play the ball. It was illegal contact to a shooter's arm, obviously below the wrist.

If the defender was vertical and just happened to make contact with the shooter's hand/arm, I would have let it go, but the defender struck the shooter on the arm without striking the ball. The rule of thumb is contact to ball + body = play on, but contact to body + ball = foul. In this case, there was contact to body without contact to the ball, and the contact was illegal.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I also had a play similar to the OP in a boys varsity game yesterday. While it was a different foul (illegal use of hands, for hitting the shooter on the hand), I made a similar call in a similar situation to the OP (I was Center calling across the lane, just as the OP was). KIPP (White, the home team) was playing Maya Angelou (Red), and the game was in the 2nd quarter, KIPP leading by ~10 points when a White player drove to the basket from Trail's side. Red 3 hit the White player on his arm as White started his shooting motion. Trail was out of position, so he did not make a call. I paused to see if Lead would make a call (the play was in his primary area), and when neither of the other officials made the call, I called the foul. After the play was over and the free throws were attempted, Red 3 admitted that I made the right call.

Why are you naming the participants? What did L say about your call?

If you put any value in a player telling you you made the right call, you have to put value in them telling you you blew it.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

That contact was not incidental to an attempt to play the ball. It was illegal contact to a shooter's arm, obviously below the wrist.

Let's see, the part of the arm below the wrist? Let's call it the hand.

4-24-2: It is legal use of hands to reach to block or slap the ball
controlled by a dribbler or a player throwing for goal or a player holding it
and accidentally hitting the hand of the opponent when it is in contact with
the ball.

Potato, potahto.
Tomato, tomahto.
Illegal, legal.

All the same.

Right?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Matt

Why are you naming the participants?

Too much specific information. Some really not needed. Maybe name dropping?

I believe that ilyazhito is an IAABO member. As a fellow IAABO member I should warn him to keep a low profile and try to remain anonymous on social media.

From IAABO International:

With the onslaught of social media (Facebook, LinkedIn etc.) there are many ways for officials to become controversial very innocently. Officials love to talk, I am sure you know the old saying "tell a ref tell the world". How often does the conversation between officials start with "I had this play" and then we continue with one upsmanship and "I had this play" and so on. We were always concerned when we were having an adult beverage in an establishment talking basketball, being heard by someone as we made comments about a coach, player or even rowdy fans. Why wouldn't we have the same concern today where, instead of being out in public making comments we now make them online? The danger again is that we do not know who views these comments, and we do not know what they will do with these comments.

My concern is that an errant comment made by an official can come back to haunt them, in fact most Division 1 conferences have added this clause to the officials contract. "The office must refrain from any public criticism of the conference, Conference staff, coaches, student athletes, and Conference athletic departments. This criticism includes communicating with the media, and other basketball officials, as well as any method of social or electronic media (Facebook, Twitter, Linkedin, email etc.). Any violation of this policy will result in disciplinary action being taken, which could include one or more of the following actions: private reprimand, suspension or termination".

This may filter down to the state athletic associations in the near future, thus the point of this article is to give our officials a heads up on what is happening in our officiating world. You just might want to give some thought to the above before you make that next "click".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Let's see, the part of the arm below the wrist? Let's call it the hand.

4-24-2: It is legal use of hands to reach to block or slap the ball
controlled by a dribbler or a player throwing for goal or a player holding it
and accidentally hitting the hand of the opponent when it is in contact with
the ball.

Potato, potahto.
Tomato, tomahto.
Illegal, legal.

All the same.

Right?

Fred and Ginger are still waiting for a reply?

While we wait, sit back and enjoy some classic Fred and Ginger. Isn't Ginger pretty?

https://youtu.be/qRrw2hDjnl4

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

That contact was not incidental to an attempt to play the ball. It was illegal contact to a shooter's arm, obviously below the wrist.

....

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Let's see, the part of the arm below the wrist? Let's call it the hand.

4-24-2: It is legal use of hands to reach to block or slap the ball
controlled by a dribbler or a player throwing for goal or a player holding it
and accidentally hitting the hand of the opponent when it is in contact with
the ball.

Potato, potahto.
Tomato, tomahto.
Illegal, legal.

All the same.

Right?

Ummm, on most shots, the hand is at the apex of the arm, making it ABOVE the wrist. If our young poster was referring to the hand, I'm pretty sure he would have said the hand. Must we make everything into an unnecessary debate followed by you quoting yourself to further a conversation point that no one other than is confused by?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... on most shots, the hand is at the apex of the arm, making it above the wrist. If our young poster was referring to the hand, I'm pretty sure he would have said the hand ... no one ... is confused ...

Agree, on a shot the hand is above the wrist. Good point.

But, ilyazhito did say the hand.

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... illegal use of hands, for hitting the shooter on the hand ...

I believe that ilyazhito may be confused, and may require a different interpretation than the one he has been using.

If the contact was on the arm, as he later stated, then my post is irrelevant.

He also mentioned the defender not striking the ball. One can legally strike the hand in contact with the ball and not ever contact the ball.

I'm sure that he'll be moseying along shortly to clarify his apparent confusion.

[LRZ]

For all the crap he sometimes gets here, let's cut ilyazhito some slack, as he did say "the defender struck the shooter on the arm" and "Red 3 hit the White player on his arm" and "It was illegal contact to a shooter's arm."

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

While I don't like the idea of what they're doing, being an independent contractor doesn't mean you get to write the contract. It means you can take it or not.

If the person offering the job wants to package some number of games together in some way, they have that right as much as you have the right to take the entire job or not.

I get what you are saying, but turning down those contracts means you don't ever advance or get games period. Am I right? That seems like the situation to me.

Why should anybody be required to do anything but high school games that they are licensed for? Sounds like the assignor is helping out the wreck leagues by requiring the high school officials to do junk games. Way too much power by one person.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree, on a shot the hand is above the wrist. Good point.

But, ilyazhito did say the hand.



I believe that ilyazhito may be confused, and may require a different interpretation than the one he has been using.

So you simply ignored his 3 other comments that referenced the arm and the one statement that referenced below the wrist during the shooting motion?

And the fact that you made this reference, "Let's see, the part of the arm below the wrist? Let's call it the hand"? The purpose of that? Can't we ever just stay on point so that whatever can be learned from the conversation doesn't get lost in your boredom?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

So you simply ignored his 3 other comments that referenced the arm and the one statement that referenced below the wrist during the shooting motion?

That would be fine if he just said that he meant to say arm instead of hand, but he never did, nor did he edit his original post.

I still don't believe that he fully understands 4-24-2. But he should be by shortly to clarify.