Philosophical state of mind

[Indy_Ref]

When you first arrive at the game, and you meet your partner for that particular game (whether you know him or not.) How do you determine who will be the referee? Do you use the "whoever is there first, chooses" philosophy or maybe the "which one of us feels like it tonight" philosophy? I'm interested in knowing how other officials determine who will be the R for a game.

Plus, comment on a pet peeve of mine:

I hate it when I'm deciding with a partner on this and he says, "Well, it doesn't really matter. Once the ball goes up, it's all the same."

Personally, I do NOT think it's the same! If I'm the R, I feel like I'm the top leader out there. I need to take charge. I'm supposed to be "final say" on anything that is in dispute--whether I need to rule about something in the rule books or whether I need to rule about something NOT in the rule books--a LEADING frame of mind.

When I'm the U (or U1, U2), even though I'm still a leader out there, I also feel as though I'm in a SUPPORT role to the R. I become more of a "behind the scenes" guy who totally supports the R and helps the R "cover all his bases."

Comments? I should add that I realize that in some places, the R & the U positions are already predetermined.

[Edited by Indy_Ref on Dec 19th, 2000 at 11:52 AM]

[mick]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref
When you first arrive at the game, and you meet your partner for that particular game (whether you know him or not.) How do you determine who will be the referee? Do you use the "whoever is there first, chooses" philosophy or maybe the "which one of us feels like it tonight" philosophy? I'm interested in knowing how other officials determine who will be the R for a game.

Plus, comment on a pet peeve of mine:

I hate it when I'm deciding with a partner on this and he says, "Well, it doesn't really matter. Once the ball goes up, it's all the same."

Personally, I do NOT think it's the same! If I'm the R, I feel like I'm the top leader out there. I need to take charge. I'm supposed to be "final say" on anything that is in dispute--whether I need to rule about something in the rule books or whether I need to rule about something NOT in the rule books--a LEADING frame of mind.

When I'm the U (or U1, U2), even though I'm still a leader out there, I also feel as though I'm in a SUPPORT role to the R. I become more of a "behind the scenes" guy who totally supports the R and helps the R "cover all his bases."

Comments? I should add that I realize that in some places, the R & the U positions are already predetermined.

[Edited by Indy_Ref on Dec 19th, 2000 at 11:52 AM]

Indy_Ref,
I do not disagree with your interpretation.
But, if it isn't specifically stated, and if I get to the book first, I am the umpire.
If I get to the book last, I am the referee, unless I am working with an Ego.
There is more to do, in most games, as the umpire.
mick

[AK ref SE]

Where I officiate, We usually come to a mutual agreement, If I was the R the last time I will be the U the next time! My previous association the most senior was the R.

Whether I am the R or the U, I am there to support my partner.
AK ref SE

[Indy_Ref]

can you explain your answer a little more? I must be mis-interpreting something.

[mick]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref
can you explain your answer a little more? I must be mis-interpreting something.

Indy_Ref,
If it's the part about an Ego, perhaps I overstated, but it's like this. If someone wants to be R ... fine. He who humbles himself..., he who exalts himself....
Generally, I do not have the slightest interest in the "difference" between R and U. I can do both jobs well.
In all, but a few cases, it seems to me that when I hit the floor, I am working with partners, or a partner, as a team, and any decisions that need to be made will be made in a quick intellectual discussion between the officials and settled, if necessary, by R making the final statement/decision and I am sure that decision will be a consensus of the officials.
Quite a few partners put much more significance on the "presumed status" of being the R.
I do not have a problem making decisions, nor do I merely coast on the back of the tandem bicycle while my partner up front is doing all the pedalling.
Maybe, I am missing something and will chose to be the referee sometime in the future, but right now it makes absolutely no difference to me.
mick

[rockyroad]

I'm not sure I understand why the statement "after the ball goes up, there isn't any difference anyway" would be a peeve...after the ball goes up, everybody on the floor better be in a "lead" frame of mind or we are all in trouble...many times the U (or U1/U2) will handle situations with coaches or table crew simply because they are the closest one...the only thing R does different is rule on any situations not specifically covered by a rule...if there needs to be a discussion, fine - discuss things - but it certainly doesn't have to be the R who then takes the decision back to coaches or table...if my partner initiated the discussion with table or coach, comes to me for whatever meager insight I can provide, he or she can certainly take our decision back to table or coach...what's the big difference??
dj

[pizanno]

Once the ball is tossed, you'd better both (or all 3) be ready to lead AND support. "once the ball goes up..." can be a positive statement from a vet to newer officials who may tend to defer on the court, and need an injection of confidence.

But if both officials are of the same level, I don't see how a game would differ by one or another serving as R.

There may be something to the EXTERNAL perception of the R, is that what you mean? Perhaps in an administrative duty such as meeting the table staff and leading the pre-game conferences, but not much in the duties of the officiating crew.

btw - if the assignment doesn't indicate who the R is, I like to flip a coin.

[AK ref SE]

Once the ball goes up "it doesn't matter", Before the ball goes up "should it matter". I say we should be a team from the time we enter the dressing room and until we pack up to go home! If being the "R" mean that much to however I am officiating with. I will let them be the "R". If we are being assigned a game. Somebody thinks that we are both capable of the assigned game. If something needs to be discussed(both or all three) need to leave the huddle, at least on an outward appearance that we made the decision as a team. If we looked divided on an issue, We will be in for a long night!

The most important thing is the kids that are playing!

I agree there has to be one leader, but you need people to lead to be a leader! "U" or "R" Flip a coin!

[Indy_Ref]

I either put too much thought into my posts...or not enough. No one seems to "get" what I'm saying. I think I'll just stick to replying to old topics rather than trying to start new ones!

Maybe a better explanation would be that even though the R AND the U('s) are ONE team, they comprise EQUAL responsibilities but philosophically different roles. No, no one is better than the other...and YES, they both will make decisions equally.

I'll leave with an example: One game last season, I had one of those big ego guys that are sometimes discussed on here...and he was a young guy! During our pre-game, he said that he wasn't going to take any sh#$ tonight and that he didn't want me to take any either. Well, in the 3rd quarter, he ended up QUICKLY tossing the visiting coach. I was getting ready to administer the FT's when I still noticed the coach standing on the sideline. I motioned to my partner, who was the R, to conference with me. I told him that if he tossed the coach, he needed to tell him to leave the confines of the floor. He asked me to do it. I said NO, because #1, you tossed him, and #2, your the R. That being said, if I tossed him as the U, I would have had no problem telling him to leave. And, there is NO rule saying that the R has to either. But, if I were the R that night, I may have taken control of the shaky situation, hustled over to the coach and told him he had to leave. If the coach would have copped an attitude and questioned why my partner hadn't asked him to leave, I would have said that I was the R and that I just wanted to keep the game moving by being the one to ask him to leave. That night as U, I felt like my partner should have asked the coach to leave (maybe I just wanted to return the favor for his pre-game attitude...but it was a JV game and he needed to learn).

Mick? "There is much more to do, in most games as the umpire." What does that mean? The referee is the only one with real pregame duties.

We must do it differently here in Indiana.

[Edited by Indy_Ref on Dec 19th, 2000 at 04:00 PM]

[AK ref SE]

Indy_ref,

I have read your posts before! I hope you continue to put new post up!! This is a great site to speak what you want to say!! Sometimes what people write, maybe what they are dealing with on the local level of their association!!! or maybe not!!
Philosophy of the game!!
Pre-game with a new or old partner is the best area to determine mood, philosophy, and the tone of the evening!

My philosopy is we are all in this together!

AK ref SE

[PAULK1]

In our association the R is always assigned so we know
who is is before hand. The pre game is the referees responsibility and he (knowingly or not) will set the tone
for the ball game. For H.S. our pre game will start 45 min
prior to tip off I try to keep mine positive and profesional
this helps us get into the right frame of mind. I will first go over rule changes and then each official will discuss
their duties pregame-jumpball. I will then cover court coverage, primary areas, press coverage, deadball mechanics,
FT and inbound plays. I will then go over our halftime and end of game plan and also a fight plan. Last we will go over
anything anybody has about the teams that are playing or any
thing that the others need to bring up. The pregame should not be a lecture from the Referee but a chance for all of us
to come together as a team so everyone should be involved.

[Peter Devana]

I would say the most experienced should always be the ref as long as he is up to date and has a good handle on the rules and interpretations.
Pistol

[mick]

Originally posted by Peter Devana
I would say the most experienced should always be the ref as long as he is up to date and has a good handle on the rules and interpretations.
Pistol

I have only 9-10 years experience. So, when we're deciding who the ref is in our 3-man, it should be the guy with 24 years, and not the guy with 22?
Hey, Peter, that works for me!
mick

[mick]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref
I either put too much thought into my posts...or not enough. No one seems to "get" what I'm saying. I think I'll just stick to replying to old topics rather than trying to start new ones! No, no... keep posting; new thoughts are necessary for everyone's growth!

Maybe a better explanation would be that even though the R AND the U('s) are ONE team, they comprise EQUAL responsibilities but philosophically different roles. No, no one is better than the other...and YES, they both will make decisions equally. We all pretty much agree.

I'll leave with an example: One game last season, I had one of those big ego guys that are sometimes discussed on here...and he was a young guy! During our pre-game, he said that he wasn't going to take any sh#$ tonight and that he didn't want me to take any either. Well, in the 3rd quarter, he ended up QUICKLY tossing the visiting coach. I was getting ready to administer the FT's when I still noticed the coach standing on the sideline. I motioned to my partner, who was the R, to conference with me. I told him that if he tossed the coach, he needed to tell him to leave the confines of the floor. He asked me to do it. I said NO, because #1, you tossed him, and #2, your the R. That being said, if I tossed him as the U, I would have had no problem telling him to leave. And, there is NO rule saying that the R has to either. But, if I were the R that night, I may have taken control of the shaky situation, hustled over to the coach and told him he had to leave. If the coach would have copped an attitude and questioned why my partner hadn't asked him to leave, I would have said that I was the R and that I just wanted to keep the game moving by being the one to ask him to leave. That night as U, I felt like my partner should have asked the coach to leave (maybe I just wanted to return the favor for his pre-game attitude...but it was a JV game and he needed to learn). I think you handled that just wonderfully. If he made the bed, he can sleep in it. Good Job! But, it seems you were the more level headed and on task official. You probably would have handled that ejection better than your partner with the attitude because "not taking any" stuff was not your primary goal for the game.

---

Mick? "There is much more to do, in most games as the umpire." What does that mean? The referee is the only one with real pregame duties.

We must do it differently here in Indiana.

[Edited by Indy_Ref on Dec 19th, 2000 at 04:00 PM]

Indy_Ref,
Naw, we probably do things the same way.
R - checks the book ; U - counts players for him and tells R how many players, and how many cheerleaders, and watches the teams warm up while R is at the table, still looking at the book.
R - says hello to coaches and asks if players are properly equipped ; U - looks for actual improper equipment and illegal logos on wristbands and headbands and makes the players turn 'em around or take 'em off.
R - turns and goes to center circle; U - gets captains and takes them to center, while making them relax and have a good thought in their minds for the game and places them on either side of R, while U has to walk to the far side of the circle.
R - gives his little speech and asks if U has anything to add; U - bites his tongue because the speech lasted way to long anyway, but still has to ask for the speaking captains, while maintaining a professional posture yet trying not to overshadow the R.
R - goes opposite; U - has to follow, from the far side of the circle, while going over the thoughts that occured to him (while R was looking at the book) and then U has to recite those thoughts to R.
R - goes to table and gets the ball which U has already procured and made sure that the bounce is right and that the ball is the correct diameter.
R - goes to center for toss; U jogs to position, checks number of players, checks the timer is ready, checks the scorer is ready
R - points at U; U - nods that everything is fine and that everyone is ready and gets ready to chop the clock to initiate the clock.
R - tosses the ball with no whistle in his mouth; U - judges whether the toss was acceptable, or not, chops the clock, determines which way to run and has the only functional whistle in the gym.
R - looks at U and runs the other way; U - has total control of the game and holds on tight until R finally gets into position.

During the game R and U share responsibilities.

Between Quarters:
R - takes the ball to half-court and puts it on his hip; U - must decide to which free throw line, or block, to jog and observe the benches and table for activity or questions.
R - points direction after horn; U - jogs over to each bench to tell them whose ball.. where, glances at the table to see that everything is fine while jogging to position at an endline, getting into position so he can count the players and be ready to approve a "Go" when R points at him.

So, it is very clear to me that there is more stuff to do if you're the Umpire. Besides, if the R job was so tough, there would be two R's in a 3-man game, but No! They add another umpire.
mick

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Peter Devana
I would say the most experienced should always be the ref as long as he is up to date and has a good handle on the rules and interpretations.
Pistol

Then how are the less experienced officials supposed learn? I work with the same crew all season long. We alternate nights as referee. If the less experienced official is the referee, he can always rely on the more experienced partners to help out if needed.