Last night I attended local varsity games as a spectator.
Boys game was great. Home team scored 39 points in the first 3 quarters and then scored 39 in the 4th quarter alone to come from 13 down and force overtime. On the tip to start overtime the visitors wound up with a breakaway.
Guard for the home team gave the shooter a little shove as he went up for the layup. Whistle, basket good, intentional foul. Home coach briefly questioned the call of intentional but I thought this was pretty obvious and apparently so did he so it was quickly dropped. Lane cleared, the shooter stepped to the line and was awarded...
3 free throws. A little buzz went through the crowd, I think, but nobody, including home coach, threw a fit like I thought someone would/should. Several people asked me, "How can this be?" I said, "It can't. They screwed up." Maybe I missed the signal. Did he call a foul and then a T? Nope, they inbounded the ball at the spot of the foul. I went to the locker room after the game and asked what the deal was. The explanation: You have to remember there was 1 shot for the foul on the made basket and 2 for the intentional. I nearly had an attack. I answered quickly, "Guys this is wrong." They were unconvinced, at first. I pushed the deal pointing out that the ONLY time 3 free throws are awarded for a single infraction are on an unsuccessful 3 point attempt. They wavered and one of the guys, obviously flustered, said, "Okay, thanks, I'll have to look that up." The other guy later said that he realized that we were right. These guys are from the same association that I am, I have partnered with both. Both of them have been officials for a long time. I have 2 questions. Am I the only one who is shocked that 2 veteran officials could make a mistake of this magnitude? (and not be called on it by the coach) Was I wrong to go into the locker room and ask them about it, and then push them on it? If I had done this, I would want somebody to tell me, the quicker, the better.

Unless this is an expected behavior by your association, or you were there as an evaluator, you had not business in the locker room. When you are there as a spectator, do just that.

As for not understanding how 2 vets could blow that call, I agree. They should no the rules.

I'm not shocked. Disappointed, obviously, b/c you'd hope that all officials would know all the rules all the time. But that's just not realistic. Not all officials are as conscientious about their rule study as the officials who come to this site. And as many officials gain more experience, they rely on that experience more than they rely on true knowledge of the rules. So when something happens that is outside of their experience, it's a crap shoot as to whether they'll get it right.

There are some officials, even on this board, who will say that it doesn't really matter b/c they were able to convince the coach without causing a stir and so what's the problem. They had showed great authority and confidence on the court and it served them very very well in this case. So don't make an issue of one FT.

I have to say that I disagree with this. When I do a game, I encourage any younger official to join my crew in the locker for both our pre-game and our post-game. In the post-game, I always ask if there are any questions about anything that happened. Usually, this is a chance for me to teach. But if it turns out to be a chance for me to learn, so much the better.

You're right most of the time, Chuck, but I'm with Grail on this one. Unless you were invited, you shouldn't have gone into the locker room, even though you are an official yourself. If you truly are simply a "spectator" for that game, you have no jurisdiction, and no right to be in the locker room.

Here's what I would have done: Go ahead and telephone the guys the next day and ask them how they came about making the call. Then go ahead and let them know the proper rule in the book.

To me, the locker room is off limits to "spectators," whether they be friends, fellow officials, or Jennifer Aniston. Although the latter would be tough to turn down. :)

I think it is perfectly all right to have fellow officials meet in the locker room after a game. This is a good time to discuss game situations while they are fresh in everybody's mind. (Of course it is always nice to meet at the local watering hole afterward to discuss the game also.)
Now, if you are a younger official and going into a Veteran's locker room:

Don't go into the locker room to embarass the officials that did the game. If you have a question about a call, keep it to yourself unless they ask you how you saw it. Then maybe say you saw it a little differently "up" where you were at.

If you have a question regarding a rule, you might ask them about the situation. If you disagree, politely say that you thought it was such and such and that you would look it up later. Don't get into a big argument about it...even if you are right you won't come across well to the Vets.

Chuck, I don't know about you...but there have been times in my career that I have missed a call. The last thing I want in the locker room after the game is some fresh faced new guy telling me how I blew it. We can talk about it sure...but to come in telling me "you are wrong" isn't politically correct around these parts.

Also, Just another ref, watch yourself while you are sitting in the stands watching a game. People will look to you to see your reactions to different calls. Try to stay neutral. I wouldn't suggest saying "They blew it" to fans around you. Heck, someday you might actually blow a call...do you want your peers sitting in the stands telling everybody about it? Do you want the Vets to know you are in the stands telling people how they are "blowing it"?

Just a little food for thought.

RD

You don't think having Jennifer Aniston in the locker room at half-time would take you out of your game?!

Around here, we have our half-time before the over time. Maybe it's different in Oregon? :D

Sorry, bits, my brain is fried. I don't get the joke. Perhaps I should be glad?

In a study done between officials and coaches, it was determined that 92% of officials knew the rules as to only 88% of the coaches.

Willie, this is a very vague claim. What does it mean that they "knew the rules"? They could pass an IAABO test? They completed a class of some sort?

My guess is that the percentage of coaches who know the rule under discussion in the original play is much much lower than 88%.

Maybe this is one of those regional things, but around here, we encourage any official at a game to go to the locker room afterward to talk to the officials. Spectator, or otherwise.


I have no problem with this approach, either.

Jennifer Aniston is welcome in any locker room that I ever find myself in.

Maybe I didn't read the original post closely enough, Rook, but it sounded to me like JAR handled it just the way you say to do it. He wasn't trying to embarass them, but he knew that they'd gotten it wrong. He asked about the situation, and received a very wrong explanation. The only thing he did differently from your post was that he gave the correct ruling, instead of saying, "Hmmmm. I didn't realize that. I'll have to look it up when I get home." I will agree with you and say that he could've simply planted the seed that way and then followed up with a phone call later. But it seems to me that JAR did not try to embarass anybody, asked a legitimate question, and got an obviously wrong answer.

Hmmmm. Let me think back. . . Missed a call. . . missed a call? Nope, I'm not sure what you mean by that. :) Of course, I've missed a call!

I agree with you, but again, it doesn't sound to me like that's what happened.

Me thinks General Westmoreland counted the officials.

First of all, I am not a "young fresh-faced guy." The two guys calling the game and I are all in the 40ish? age group.
They have been registered officials in the association longer than I have but I consider us all to be roughly on the same level as officials. One of these two guys actually
called me a couple of days before the test to ask for some study guide answers, so I suppose that means he has some respect for my opinion.



When you say missed a call, I think of a question of judgment. (Boy I can't believe you called a blocking foul on that guy when the dribbler elbowed him in the face.) I wouldn't discuss a judgment call in that situation unless I was asked. The deal here was a black and white issue. I asked the question first to be sure I knew what the call had been, and then pointed out, perhaps not as subtly as I could have, that a mistake had been made. This was not a debatable point. As I said before, I want to know when I make a mistake of this magnitude. I still can't believe the coach didn't say anything. As for political correctness, it's pretty hard to come by around here.





I apply the same deal here when it comes to judgment calls.
I try to be pretty diplomatic. "Did you think that was a foul?" "Oh, I don't know, it could have gone either way."
Often I defend the guys on the court. But this mistake was obvious to A LOT of people. They asked me what the rule was and I told them. They could then draw their own conclusion.

Not that big of a deal.
 

I can only speak for my area. It is very acceptable in the circles I officiate, ot go in the locker room and ask questions about what took place on the floor. It helps us all when we discuss those things, not matter how long you have been officiating. We all become better officials by having other officials "have our back" if you will.

And if anyone is surprised that veteran officials missed a call, then I guess they must think we are not human beings. Of course we miss calls and miss rules from time to time. But the game of basketball is not a sport where the rules are challenged that much.

I also think Chuck once again does not get it. No one that I have ever known on this board has ever said that "presentation" was the most important thing to officiating. But it will help you out much more than being a Rulebook official that only looks at the letter of the law and not the common sense or reality of how those rules should be applied. This is not one of these times where that is at issue. These officials screwed up a rule, maybe because it has never happen and we are human. Basketball is a game of judgement, not rules. It is how you call fouls and violations that mean more in this game. Why, because the fouls and violations can be disputed every time. I cannot speak for anyone else, but I have called my share of intentional fouls, but I have never called one or been in a position to call one where a 3 point shot was taken. Sometimes the best way to "own" a rule, is to screw it up first.

Peace

JR makes a great point. The rules that I NEVER NEVER EVER get wrong are the ones I screwed up on in a live game. Experience is the best teacher!

I was working a state championship football game and our crew messed up on the administration of a foul. It had no effect on the outcome of the game and even the state rules chief missed it at first, but later, when we found out what we did wrong, I vowed NEVER to get it wrong again. And I haven't.

When you have been the perfect referee in a game, it is time to hang up the Fox 40, walk out the gym door and never come back!

Originally posted by WinterWillie
In a study done between officials and coaches, it was determined that 92% of officials knew the rules as to only 88% of the coaches.

The figures were given out at an association meeting and they were a cross section of many sports. I guess if you really wanted a scientific explanation then you would have to know how many of the referees were also coaches!!!!

The point being that when it comes to knowing the rules, the statistics favor the referee, no matter how you look at it.

JAR, was the "LOT of people" that you are referring to above happen to be fans that were sitting around you while you watched the game? If they were, you just stabbed the guys on the floor right in the back. Going over a rules mistake in the dressing room with the officials involved is one thing, but basically telling the fans that the officials screwed up is a whole different matter.

Hopefully, I've misread your post, and you didn't really do that to your fellow officials.

Nah, you didn't miss much. ;) Only being a smart a$$ about the (insignificant) difference between distractions in the locker at half-time v. the original sitch, which was after an overtime game.

I respectfully disagree. The fans knew the officials screwed up. They just could not quote chapter and verse to prove the point. When fans ask you "Was that wrong?" what do you say? If it is a question of a block/charge call, it
is easy to say "I don't know." because you don't. You may have a strong opinion, but it is often good to keep that to yourself. Fans sometimes will disagree and ask me to confirm it: "That wasn't a travel, was it?" "Actually, it was. Good call." "Hmmph!" and a lot of times this person won't ask you anything else. But if it is a question on a rule, chances are I do know, and those who know me know that I know. I find it hard not to tell what the rule is in this situation.

[Edited by just another ref on Dec 7th, 2003 at 06:45 PM]

Re: Not that big of a deal.
 

Again, I have almost completely stopped reading and responding to Rut's posts, but I'll just make one comment:

I do get it. Honest. I did not say that anyone had claimed that presentation was the most important blah blah blah.

All I said, was that some people might acknowledge that the rule was misapplied, but also hold that it was not a big deal since the presentation made the game continue to flow smoothly.

Really.
 

You do not have to respond to any of my posts at all. My comments were not really directed at you, but at your statements that I felt are incorrect and are commonly stated inaccurately. You could have been anyone, I still would have responded the way I did. Because I feel that the "perception" that people on this board have tried to characterize as anyone as missing a rule, as someone that cares more about (yes I am going to say it) "Presense" than trying to learn the rules. It takes time to learn the rules. Because the rules you learn the most, are the ones you screw up or at best have to deal with. And yes, veterans make those mistakes just like rookies sometimes. They just do not make them as often.

Peace

I was on my way back from a Tourny, passed the site of another tourny and thought that I'd stop in. I was in street clothes so I went and sat down. Waited for half-time I was in the stands behind the table (i like to watch the game from here when I can) and when the refs came to get thier stuff at the half i pulled out my card to verify to them I was an official and asked if I could join them in the hospitality room. they said sure... I saw a few things on some plays and I asked them about it. I'm still a young official and so it was mostly for trying to expand my knowlege.... I then asked if I could tell them what I saw from the stands, I knew one of the offiicals from our local region meetings and so he didnt have a problem with it. So we talked about it and they asked for me to hang around and talk to them again after the game. Its all about how you approach the situation of going into the locker room after the game. If I want to go ima usually be by the door onthier way out or have asked before the game even started.

Now about having a co-official in the stands.. I called a game yesterday, freshman girls A championship for a tounry in the area. I was paird with a new official, our assignor, and a varsity official who helps train at training meetings before the season. I was nervouce but we had a good wrap on the FIRST half. 2nd half I made some calls back to back and I shoulda switched with my partner but her and I kinna lost each other till the 4th quarter. Now - having the other official in the stands kinna hurt us. I was watching the game before mine with my assignor/evlauator and someone asked us a question or two... I just let him handle it because I was starting to put the sponge on my shoe and my assignor picked up on that i was trying to avoid the situation.

He apologized to us both after the game for not changing after his games because it drew extra attention to us on the floor having him there in uniform with his jacket on. I've dropped into some games as a spectator. I always sit on the visitors side (less likely to be noticed and thats usually behind the table) and dont say anything to anyone. If i dont agree with something or it looked funny i make sure that if i make a reaction its under my breath.

Re: Really.
 

You said. . .


And then you said. . .

How you figure?

I am not going to get into a pissy fit with you.
 

You are the ones that made the comments, so yes the comments I made were in response to what you said, but I do not feel you are the only one that feels that way. Really Chuck, the comments are not personal, just an observation on my part.

I am sure Chuck that you are a very good official, but you just do not share many of the things that makes me successful and that make many others that I know very successful. And you know what, that is alright with me. So if you still want to keep making a point to everyone that you do not read my posts anymore or respond to them, please do not do me any favors. ;)

Peace

Now I know exactly where you stand.

I stand by my comments above!

"Sorry, I was looking the other way and didn't see it."

This is fine when asked about the play on the floor. But what about: "They just gave that guy 3 free throws for the intentional foul on a made basket. That's not right, is it?" What do you say to that? I was absent that day?:)

Everything else I think is fine, but not this.

You should have been more "diplomatic", as you put it, on that one.

There's an old saying - "in difficult times, wise men remain silent." Don't think that was an option here, but you could have worded your response better.

The locker room stuff is no big deal - we're all officials, we're all there to support, question, test, push, and mentor each other. It's just business...it's not personal (at least most of the time).

I don't know what you say, but what I say is "Sorry, I was looking the other way and didn't see it."

A cardinal sin, most definitely. :mad:

These are not direct quotes, merely an abbreviated way of relating the meat of the conversation. I believe that my
actual words probably were a bit more diplomatic. I also pointed out that since the visitors went on to win by 9, the 1 extra free turned out to have no real bearing on the game, as is often the case when we officials make a "horrendous, unforgivable, mistake."

"I haven't studied all the new rule changes for this year yet."

"He's been at this a lot longer than I have."

"When I have a rules question, I call him"

"Maybe he's getting his HS and his college rules mixed up, I'm not sure."

"Here's the rule book, look it up."

"I'm not an evaluator, so I'm not the person to judge."

"Don't ask me, I got a 75 on my test!" (Don't say this if your game is next, not last)

"Is it going to affect the game?"

"He's using the Rule 2-3 thing."

All true, more or less, and none to the point. It's a great exercise for many parts of life.

excellent suggestions Rainmaker!

I especially like that one. Brilliant.

ok, hope i got my call right,a1 in the bonus, b2 intentionally fouls a1 to stop clock , technical free throws awarded, a1 gets ball near spot of foul. bonus fouls not awarded. this is the correct call to my recollection at the time no grief from coach, been looking through book to verify. help appreciated always learning. THANKS

Sounds like you got the call right, but are just using the wrong terms to describe it. If B2 intentionally fouls A1, for whatever reason, the penalty is 2 free throws plus the ball near the spot of the foul. The only exception would be if the foul is in the act of shooting a 3 point shot which is unsuccessful. The bonus and the word technical play no part in this ruling if I understand your description accurately.

the intentional foul was on the floor not on the shot. team A had 8 team fouls at the time of the intentional foul. if i understand the rule correctly the bonus free throws are not awarded on a intensional foul but if the intentional foul is in the act of shooting and the shot is made score counts no bonus. now if the shot is not successful only the free throws for the intensional foul is awarded plus ball out of bounds at nearest spot of infraction. does this sound right? HS rules thanks.

should be team B had 8 team fouls

No matter what kind of foul we're talking about, you don't shoot FTs for that foul and bonus FTs for being over the limit. Suppose A1 is fouled in the act of shooting. It's a common foul and it's Team B's 10th foul of the half. You are not going to give 2 shots for the shooting foul and 2 shots for the automatic bonus. Right?

So in your case, you award 2 FTs and the ball for the intentional, and forget about any bonus FTs.

I hope that answers your question.

The penalty for an intentional foul is the same no matter how many team fouls the team has. Two shots plus ball near the spot of the foul. The only exception is three shots plus ball on unsuccessful three point shot. If fouled in the act of shooting and it goes in, whether a 2 or a 3, count the basket, two shots plus ball.

What he said.

thanks. just wanted to be sure on my understanding of the rule. GREAT FORUM