Changing your partner's call

[OverAndBack]

I'm checking in here a little late, because I've been out having a life.

Can you order those from Honig's?

[ChrisSportsFan]

I agree that you must be absalutely sure before even getting together with you partner to discuss what you saw. If Partner 1 is not willing to get it right and Partner 2 doesn't want to hear it, then maybe we should call them individual 1 and 2. Nobody wants to get shown up in front of the whole gym, I think you lose more credibility when everyone else saw what you missed. There is a reason why the game requires more than 1 referee. The game is not about you or me, it's about getting it right. This should be properly pregamed and if it comes up, both 1 and 2 need to use proper tact, but get it right.

That's all I've got to say about that for now.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
What happens if I don't think that I actually did miss the call, but I had it right?

The fact is, tho, that you didn't have it right. Otherwise your partner wouldn't have blown the whistle.

What you are actually saying here is that your judgement is better than mine.

Nah. I'm saying my view was better on that one play in that gray area. I'll still work with you tomorrow night.

I may wanna disagree with that.

Then you'd be wrong twice. The premise of this procedure is that you missed the call and it's obvious to your partner. If you accept that premise (viz., this will only happen when you inadvertantly make an obvious error), then I don't see the problem.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by OverAndBack

Can you order those from Honig's?

Beautiful. Absolutely classic!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by SavaahnTy


1) ON a side note, it almost seems as though both of you are under the notion that your area is your area, and you dont need nor want any help.. ever. To a point, I would agree.
2) But as a strong official, I am absolutely NOT going to make the DEFINITIVE SIGNAL of two fingers towards the floor UNLESS I AM 3,000% SURE. I will also respectfully disagree that this makes me someone who is NOT a team player.

3) But in the original post, the topic was a three-pointer... Not the changing of a call, not a difference of opinion in judgement.............I saw him on the line, and I want to get the call correct.

1) I have never said anything like that or intimated anything like that anywhere. On the contrary, I fully agree with getting the call right and using your partner(s) help to do so. What I completely disagree with is an official that is not going to give his partner any HELP; he is just overruling his partner's call; and he could be going outside of his primary to do that also. Please don't make up inferences that aren't there just to try and make your own point.

2) Whatinthehell does being a "strong official" have to do with getting the correct call? Does that mean that your judgement is ALWAYS better than all of the weak mortals that you get stuck with? There's never any need to talk to them? Just change their call if you don't agree with it? My opinion of you is unchanged. Unfortunately.

3) Say what? You really need to go back and read the original post. The topic was an article called "CHANGING THE CALL"!!! The article said that you just CHANGE THE CALL by OVERRULING your partner WITHOUT ANY DISCUSSION!!! You can get the call correct by simply taking 10 seconds to talk to your partner(s). What happens if both of your partners disagree with you? Does the "strong" official get 3 votes, and the other 2 shlubs only get 1 apiece? Btw, how do you know whether your partners agree with you unless you do talk to them?

Lah me.

PS- I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how they can ignore the very explicit language in both the NCAA and NFHS rulesets that states that you CAN'T change your partner's call.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
[/B]

Then you'd be wrong twice. The premise of this procedure is that you missed the call and it's obvious to your partner. If you accept that premise (viz., this will only happen when you inadvertantly make an obvious error), then I don't see the problem. [/B][/QUOTE]Nope, the premise of this procedure is that YOU think that I missed the call. I might think something that's completely different. And you won't know what I think because you're too busy overruling my call.

If you think that I made an obvious error, hey, tell me about it. If I agree with you, or I'm not 100% confident of my original call, then I'll change that call. If I don't agree with you and I'm sure that I got it right, then I won't change my call. It's that simple. I'll live or die with what the films say then- which should be the right way to end up. My ego isn't that big that I wouldn't admit that I mighta made a mistake. Unfortunately, you're not saying the same thing if you just overrule one of my calls without discussing it with me first.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Oct 13th, 2004 at 09:23 AM]

[Jimgolf]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
PS- I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how they can ignore the very explicit language in both the NCAA and NFHS rulesets that states that you CAN'T change your partner's call.

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown
JR, this quote came out of the NFHS Preseason Basketball Guide 04-05.

Because NFHS tells you to do this in their pre-season Guide?
An interesting point. Where do the Officials Manual and Pre-season Guide come in the hierarchy of manuals?

The Officials Manual deems this a "help situation", which "should be discussed thoroughly during the crew's pregame conference, so there will be no surprises on the court," but mentions nothing about "Changing", as the Pre-season Guide terms it. The sections about Three-Point Tries specifically state that it is the responsibility of the official whose area the player is in to signal the three, and little else about the other officials.

[SavaahnTy]

JR,

You seem to be taking all of this a bit personally, so I apologize if you think I am attacking you, your viewpoint, or anything you said.

I was under the impression that we were all using this forum to discuss our viewpoints and situations to help us improve ourselves for the reasons of our choosing....not to attack one another and/or cut up every thing that we say.

That said, your viewpoint of me is irrelivant in this situation, I am not trying to prove MY point....I am giving my viewpoint and experience on the subject, please note I said " it seems ", as well as " a strong" and not " THE strong", and it was my understanding that the original post went something like " if one official signals a three-pointer, but another official is CERTAIN that the shooter was on or inside.." which is why I stated the original post was about a three-point attempt.

The way you are describing handling the situation and the way the Fed says to handle the situation are ways that I would exactly handle the situation if I was OVERRULING a call by my partner ( Call, in my opinion, would be something my partner blows his whistle on...ie, in my opinion, an out of bounds call...which I also stated ). The original post, if I remember correctly, is about one partner signaling a three, and another partner, BEING CERTAIN, signals a two.

I stated what my experiences and viewpoints were, and the reality that I or anyone else may who have simliar viepoints MAY HAVE TO CHANGE THAT VIEWPOINT depending on the conferences they officiate. I further stated that as " a strong official ", which I believe I am, I ( not everyone else, anyone else, or whomever else, but ME ME ME ) would not make the DEFINITIVE SIGNAL that the shooter was, in fact, on the line unless I was 3000% SURE, telling my partner I am sure I got this. I ALSO said that if my partner did this to me, I would trust him 100% and roll with his call....because this is the answer that I have been given time and again on the situation, and RESPECTFULLY disagreed that having this viewpoint made me an official who is NOT a team player....

and you break all of this down and attack me for it?

Interesting.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, the premise of this procedure is that YOU think that I missed the call.

[/b]
I'm not sure why this is a point of contention between us. This whole conversation takes place in the context of the fact that one of us missed the call and it's obvious. We can yes, no, yes, no till March Madness. But the procedure is designed for a situation in which a call is missed and it's obvious to another official. That's the premise. The call was missed. If you reject that premise, that's fine. But then the point of the conversation changes and everything that I've written on the subject in this thread is moot.

Secondly, of course I think you missed the call. But on top of that, guess what? You actually did miss the call. Otherwise, I give you my solemn oath that I won't blow the whistle.

I might think something that's completely different.

Of course that's what you think, otherwise you wouldn't have given the touchdown signal. But you know what? On that one play in that gray area in transition, your eyes tricked you. Badly. So badly that it's obvious to me.

If you think that I made an obvious error, hey, tell me about it. If I agree with you, or I'm not 100% confident of my original call, then I'll change that call.

And when you and I work together (hey, that would be fun! ), that's how we'll do it b/c you obviously feel strongly about it. But for most of my games, we pre-game it so that we don't need to huddle to get this particular call right. And I don't have a problem with that.

[mick]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Secondly, of course I think you missed the call. But on top of that, guess what? You actually did miss the call. Otherwise, I give you my solemn oath that I won't blow the whistle.

Chuck,
My philosphical difference is that when JR marked the three and I saw that it was wrong, then I think I missed the call unless he comes to me and asks.
mick

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
/B]

And when you and I work together (hey, that would be fun! ), that's how we'll do it b/c you obviously feel strongly about it. But for most of my games, we pre-game it so that we don't need to huddle to get this particular call right. And I don't have a problem with that.

[/B][/QUOTE]Chuck, that procedure is fine if the official who is getting his call corrected agrees that he mighta been wrong. But please tell me how the same procedure is gonna work out if the official who made the original call is just as equally and adamantly sure that he got the original call right and didn't miss it. Is this how then you handle it?- I give the signal for a three. You stop the clock and signal a 2. Because we're not supposed to huddle and talk about it, I just remain where I was, blow my whistle again and signal a 3. Which you respond to by again blowing your whistle and signalling a 2, and so on..........

That whole procedure is based on the original calling official agreeing with you that his initial call was or may have been wrong. That procedure does not allow for the case where the original calling official is sure that he was right. Imo, there is no problem using BOTH procedures in a game- not getting together if the original calling official did have some doubts, but definitely getting together if both officials are confident that they each had the correct call-even if those calls differ. And if those calls DO differ and the original calling official doesn't want you to change his call, the rule book says that you CAN'T change his call.

[Jimgolf]

Some more quotes from the rule book:
2-6 "No official has the authority to set aside or question decisions made by other official(s) within the limits of their respective outlined duties"

BUT

2-5-3 The referee shall "decide whether a goal shall count if the officials disagree"

Aren't these contradictory?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Jimgolf
Some more quotes from the rule book:
2-6 "No official has the authority to set aside or question decisions made by other official(s) within the limits of their respective outlined duties"

BUT

2-5-3 The referee shall "decide whether a goal shall count if the officials disagree"

Aren't these contradictory?

Not really. Deciding whether a goal shall count or not is listed within the R's respective outlined duties. Overruling another official's 2 0r 3-point call is not listed in ANYBODY's respective duties. You just can't do it.

[Jurassic Referee]

This is how your crew is supposed to work!


You don't see one of these guys standing over in the corner trying to do his own thing, do you? Nope, these guys are working together!

[jritchie]

that is perfect.... 5 pages and counting on disagreeing with each other on a 3...wow