Former NBA Referee Pleads The Sixth: Hugh Hollins

[Love2ref4Ever]

Today on ESPN radio Dan Patrick interviewed former NBA official Hugh Hollins about "STAR SYSTEM". This is some of the remarks that he made on this subject, what do you think?
Hue Hollins, former NBA referee: When asked if the refs have a 'star system', he admitted that refs gather and make sure when a star player has five fouls that the sixth is a sure foul and not a ticky-tack foul. They don't want to lose one of the key players unless it's a sure foul. He also said that when a player such as Oliver Miller goes in the game, they know that he's in there to foul and are ready to call them on him. He goes into this extensively.

[ace]

I dont call that the star system. I call thate GAME MANAGEMENT

[BktBallRef]

Makes sense to me.

If a player has 4 fouls and I'm aware of it, I want to make the best call I can possibly make. A player/team shouldn't be penalized because I wasn't focused.


If you know a team is going to stategically foul intentionally, aren't you going to call the first contact that's an obvious attempt to foul. How is that any different than a player who's been sent in to foul?

[cford]

This same discussion was in thread "Ref shows favoritism? - http://www.officialforum.com/thread/13922"
but it's now gone. Does anyone now what happened to it? Did a moderator delete it? I was looking forward to Mark and everyone's answer on how they call multiple fouls.

[d1ref2b]

Shouldn't the first 4 fouls be quality fouls as well? Why wait until the fifth foul to make sure that it is a "good" foul. Is this game managmement or game manipulation?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by d1ref2b
Shouldn't the first 4 fouls be quality fouls as well? Why wait until the fifth foul to make sure that it is a "good" foul. Is this game managmement or game manipulation?

Yes, all fouls should be quality fouls. However, fouls 1 through 4 don't foul a player out, do they?

There's nothing wrong with making sure the disqualifying foul is a strong call.

[Hawks Coach]

Didn't see the other thread, but I have to say that I just love the media. Give Shaq his 6th on a questionable call or a touch foul, they will scream that you can't foul him out on that play. Make sure you know he has 5 so you don't screw up and foul him out like that, and you are throwing the game to the stars.

There really is no correct way to ref, if you believe everything you read or hear.

BTW, my preference is that refs know when a player is close to disqualification and they make sure they don't knock him out with an iffy call. The only other sport that has a disqualification like bball is soccer, and most refs wo't give the second yellow unless you ask for it. Go out of your way to get it, they'll give it to you, just like a red card. But the first yellow will come out a lot quicker than the second, because they aren't equivalent. The first can be used to control how a game is played, the second fundamentally alters the game. Same with early foul calls - you may call things tight to control a game.

[footlocker]

I am uncomfortable refereeing a game with this philosophy. If it is true that Hollins "admitted that refs gather and make sure when a star player has five fouls that the sixth is a sure foul and not a ticky-tack foul," then I have to chalk it up to good business management. After all, the NBA is a business and they, better than I, know what sells.

However, I will not ref this way for a HS contest. The two are different. I cannot extrapolate that I should take on traits of NBA officials simply because it is a higher level of basketball. I officiate under the belief that all fouls should be called based on their own merit and applied equally to all players. As much as this is possible, I referee this way.

[Damian]

I have at times noticed that a player has 4 fouls (High School). However, it is the players and the coaches responsibility to make sure the player doesn't do something stupid.

Otherwise, someone with 4 fouls will get away with some fouls that otherwise would be called. To me consistancy is very important.

I had a game last week, where a guard pretended to throw the ball at an opponents face when taking the ball in bounds. I T'd him up right away. It was his second and he was out of the game. The team finished with 4 players. He was acting stupid.

[icallfouls]

I agree with ACE, this is a game management situation. The higher up the ladder we go, the more conferences we work, the more important it is to be aware of this type of situation.

As an example, I was working a playoff game this past year. Winner goes to state, loser goes home. The point guard of one of the teams picks up their 4th foul early in the 3rd qtr. Coach removes the player and the visitors start to exploit the new match up. A few minutes later the point guard re-enters the game. Definitely a coaching strategy filled with potential danger. There is a timeout called. My partner and I get together and discuss a couple of things and this situation. We agree that if the player is going to pick their 5th, it is going to be one that can be seen from the concession stand. Sure enough, with 2 minutes to go in the third, the point guard runs over the defense on a drive to the basket. The easiest call of the game.

It is just good game management or preventative officiating to be aware of as many situations as possible (ie, timeouts, AP, team fouls, player fouls).

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by icallfouls
I agree with ACE, this is a game management situation. The higher up the ladder we go, the more conferences we work, the more important it is to be aware of this type of situation.

As an example, I was working a playoff game this past year. Winner goes to state, loser goes home. The point guard of one of the teams picks up their 4th foul early in the 3rd qtr. Coach removes the player and the visitors start to exploit the new match up. A few minutes later the point guard re-enters the game. Definitely a coaching strategy filled with potential danger. There is a timeout called. My partner and I get together and discuss a couple of things and this situation. We agree that if the player is going to pick their 5th, it is going to be one that can be seen from the concession stand. Sure enough, with 2 minutes to go in the third, the point guard runs over the defense on a drive to the basket. The easiest call of the game.

It is just good game management or preventative officiating to be aware of as many situations as possible (ie, timeouts, AP, team fouls, player fouls).

Hey, Jim, I gave you 3-person on the 9th and 23rd as you requested. I just need a confirmation that you've got it in your palm pilot.

[Kelvin green]

Originally posted by footlocker
I am uncomfortable refereeing a game with this philosophy. If it is true that Hollins "admitted that refs gather and make sure when a star player has five fouls that the sixth is a sure foul and not a ticky-tack foul," then I have to chalk it up to good business management. After all, the NBA is a business and they, better than I, know what sells.

However, I will not ref this way for a HS contest. The two are different. I cannot extrapolate that I should take on traits of NBA officials simply because it is a higher level of basketball. I officiate under the belief that all fouls should be called based on their own merit and applied equally to all players. As much as this is possible, I referee this way.

I hate to tell you but College Ball is business, and increasingly so is High School. I will reiterate that it is good game management to know how many fouls there are and who has them. For example player (star) just picks up #4 and coach wants to substitute but maybe the player isn't to the scoretable per rule.... I will let the sub in. I dont want to have the playr foul out especially if coach is trying to replace him/her.

You have two players involved on a play B1 and B2 and they both smack A1 in the act of shooting at the exact same time. Who do you call the foul on or do you call a multiple foul? (yeah right) So you pick one... Now throw into mix B1 has four fouls B2 has 2. Who you going to pick?

The point of this thread is that and I think it is a good rule in refereeing is that if a player is going to foul out, it needs to be an obvious foul.

Here is an example. When I am on the floor, I look hard and early for an off ball call. On a marginal pick I may call some slight contact. It may just barely impede the defensive player, but I call it early. Now the coaches know we are watching off ball and will not put up with the marginal pick (if you let a margina one go they surely get worse) However middle of third quarter I probably will not foul a player out on the slight contact. As mentioned before you will need to be able to see it from more than the first row..

Sometimes players do dumb things. I fouled out a player a couple of weeks ago (starting center)... My partner calls 2 away from play pushes. I get him for two pushes at ball. It is a close game and they are working it around. The center sets an ugly pick that takes the defender completely out of the play. #5 and now he is gone....He earned the foul. His coach hated it (said I was picking on his player) but never once did he say it was not the right call...

This is good game management just like knowing how many time outs a team has left. How many team fouls each tem has, who has the arrow, who has delay warnings and for what. Without knowing this you will call in a vaccuum and most of the time this turns out ok, but there will be the close ones every now and then that with out knowing whats going on out there the mistakes will be made that viewed in retrospect will be serious mistakes that could have been corrected by having good game awareness and game management skills

[d1ref2b]

Originally posted by BktBallRef


Yes, all fouls should be quality fouls. However, fouls 1 through 4 don't foul a player out, do they?

There's nothing wrong with making sure the disqualifying foul is a strong call. [/B]

Without the first 4 a player can not foul out. I agree that #5 should be a strong call, but 1 thru 4 should be good strong fouls as well. It all depends on how you define a "strong call". If the fouls is an "absolute" and you would have called it in the first 30 seconds of the game, you have to call it in the last 30

[icallfouls]

Julie

I am still waiting for you to give the particulars, as I have accepted the games and the dates in question are reserved as we agreed. I have yet to receive the where, and when info. You previously identified 2 locations.

Send me an email to give the updates.

Thanks

[footlocker]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kelvin green

This is good game management just like knowing how many time outs a team has left. How many team fouls each tem has, who has the arrow, who has delay warnings and for what. Without knowing this you will call in a vaccuum and most of the time this turns out ok, but there will be the close ones every now and then that with out knowing whats going on out there the mistakes will be made that viewed in retrospect will be serious mistakes that could have been corrected by having good game awareness and game management skills

I agree here; well worded. My original post bolded the word 'star'. The point here is that in HS ball, whether anyone thinks its good or not, I avoid any star treatment. It's HS. When I ask about fouls, or just pay attention on my own, its for all players and not the best ones. I want all the calls to be obvious, I too look for screens and holds off ball early. I believe the game should have a flow, and some calls early are to set the stage. But any player that is at four fouls will get the same courtesy of my partner's and my attention to make certain the final foul is not a phantom foul. That's it.

The NBA refs can go by whatever philosphy is perscribed by the league. Anyone that thinks we should follow what the NBA does in officiating learning from a different set of rules than I.