We all know that game management is important to officiating. I'm posting this because I watched two officials do this and want others to learn from it.

Team A had the ball down by one. They had the full length of the court to go with 9.7 seconds left in the game. The two officials (two man crew) meet at the center circle. The referee talked about letting the players decide the game and not to make a cheap call. He then instructs the umpire (his partner) to tell team A (as they break their huddle) to make sure their picks are legal. As team B breaks their huddle, he instructs them to play defense with their feet and not to create a silly reaching foul. Team A inbounds the ball and the game ends with team A scoring the winning basket.

I thought this was a great way to manage the end of a hard fought contest. These two officials did their jobs, and still allowed the players to decide the game. If a moving pick had been called, then team A and their coach would have known that the officials were looking for it. At the same time, if a reach had been called then team B and it's players and coach would have known that the officials were looking for that as well. I think as young officials, we can learn from these veterans and manage these types of situations like they did.

Bama,
A reach is NOT a foul. A hit, push, hold, etc. is a foul. Please do not use the term reaching foul. To us on the forum who know the rules it is like scratching one's fingers on a chalkboard. We just cringe.

Also, my personal opinion is that the officials should just call the game in the last ten seconds the same way they called the first 31 minutes and 50 seconds. There is no need to instruct the players not to foul. I would not do what these "veteran" officials did. Especially, if they used the word reach!

I agree with BamaRef that game management is important, and it's useful to get together the last few seconds and talk about as much as possible. I do agree with Nevada, though, that "reach" isn't a foul, and I'll add also that "moving picks" aren't fouls, either. I also think the coaches should WANT the refs to look for illegal screens and illegal hits and slashes at the ball. That's what we get the big bucks for! And even if these fouls are committed and called, it's still the players that decided the game. The ref just made sure that the players decisions were acknowledged and carried out to their legal ends.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. We all cringe and grind our teeth every time anybody uses terms like "reaching in" and "over the back." And yes, using the term "moving pick" is still a hanging offense in some states.

It seems to me that the officials in question weren't posting to the board, or trying to impress other officials. They were talking to players. They chose to speak the players' language. Game/player/coach management is mostly about effective communication. Being bi-lingual can help.

Ray, I agree, but guardedly. If we keep using inexact terms to people who don't know any better, we keep suffering under the misunderstandings that make our lives more difficult. I think that's really a liability.

Just Ref
 

My two cents, we are not getting paid to coach. Good idea for the crew to huddle up and make sure that you're on the same page, but to coach, remind, or whatever else you want to call it to the teams...no way.

Re: Just Ref
 

So you never tell the inbounder "SPOT!" or tell the defender not to reach across the OOB plane?

rainmaker--

I would have to agree with BITS. Most basketball players go their entire careers without learning anything about the rule book or officiating. Ex. Ask an experienced player where an official stands after he throws you the ball for a FT? Most wouldn't have a clue. That's not their concern. Making the shot is all they care about. As an official, it's important to know the rules, implications, jargon, etc. of officiating. When talking to other officials, it certainly is appropriate to use "official's lingo", but when talking to players & coaches, they know what you are talking about when you say "moving pick" or "reach". Can they give you a definition--not a chance. But in order to communicate effectively with coaches/players, you better be able to talk their language.

However, I agree that "coaching" by officials in the last few seconds of a game is something that I would be hesitant to do. I like officials who talk players out of bad situations early in a game, but by the end of the game--just call it like you've been calling it. The players should have it figured out by then.

Re: Re: Just Ref
 

I think you tell them that on every inbound--not just the one with :10 left.

I generally agree that we should call the last 10 seconds (or whatever) of a close game the same way we called the rest of the game. However, we have all made calls that we wish we could take back and said to ourselves, "That was cheap; I should have let that one go!" As long as we don't let "good" calls go by, I think it is good to give a mental reminder not to make a cheap call at that point.

Agreed--

Everyone calls one once-in-a-while that they immediately think--"that was a little cheap"--you just don't want to be think that in the last :10. Making a cheap one in the first is a lot different than making a cheap one in the fourth!

Cheap or not, if it is a call then call it accordingly, otherwise you have nothing. The degree of "cheapness" may vary among officials even within the same crew. If you see the call, then make it but don't try to prioritize or rank it simply because there are 10 seconds left in the contest.

First of all, there's no such thing as a "cheap" call. We get paid the same for every call.

Second, don't "coach" during the game unless you think it's OK for the coaches to referee.

I'm in the camp that says we should ref not coach. I think we should be worrying about making sure that <b>we refs</b> are on the same page, not coaching the kids. A good thing to do in that sitch might also be to remind the timekeeper (part of our crew) to watch for the "chop time" signal before starting the clock.

My experience has been that any time I have worked with a veteran ref who has said things in his pregame like "let the players decide the game" or "I don't make cheap calls," it's been followed by a game that is entirely too physical. I think saying, "let's have a slow whistle and let's not anticipate the calls" is better.

Z

No official wants to make a cheap call at the end of a game or at any other part of the game. I would also say that by not making a call at the end of the game (as we have all heard many times "let the players decide the game") giving one team an advantage over the other team. Isn't that why we are there. To make sure both teams play on a level court?

My sister has a habit of starting a sentence, like, "Gosh the other day I was just standing there on the corner, I mean, you know over there, and this guy just sort of you know..." trailing off, and then saying, "Well you know what I mean." But most of the time I have no idea what she means. Sometimes I feel that way with the players and coaches. I want to say, "No I don't konw what you mean."

I can tell you for certain that at least 95% of non-refs DON"T know what a ref means when the ref says "moving screen". Everyone hears that term and assumes that any screen that moves is illegal. That isn't the case. Any screen can move anywhere as long as there is no contact. Some moving screens are legal, even with lots of contact. But the above 95% of folks "out there" don't know that. So if I see an illegal moving screen, and say the phrase, "moving screen" what I mean and what they hear are two entirely different animals. Then the next time that group of observers sees what they think is a moving screen, they want to know why the ref isn't calling it.
Same with "reach".

The fact of the matter is, if we as refs say the phrases, "Over the back," "moving screen," "reaching in", and several others, we re-inforce false understandings and make everyone's life more difficult. It's far more constructive to say "illegal screen," "hit", "push" and so on.

too much communication?
 

If A scored the winning basket after this bit of end of game management, chances are that somebody on the B side at least thought something along the following lines:

"Why didn't you get a hand in his face??"

"I couldn't!! That ref said if I did ANYTHING he would call a foul on me."

Who was it that first said: "You can't quote/misquote silence."

Re: too much communication?
 

Some mime.

I am all for getting together with my partner late in a close game to make sure we are on the same page, know the team foul count, time out situation and to remind the trail that he or she has the last shot. It would also be a good time for the "R" to check the book and make sure everything is good with the book and to remind the timer when to start the clock.

As for coaching:

Players should know how to play and I am not going to tell them not to "reach" or to set good screens. Some players reach in and steal the ball. A reach is not a foul.

If I have been making the right calls all game long they they should know they what they can and cqnnot do by the last ten seconds.

I will on a free throw situation remind players to let it hit and on an inbound play remind the thrower if it is a spot throw in or they can run the baseline, especially after a timeout.

As far as letting the players decide the game.

I agree. They decide it in the first minute and the last. If you call a foul in the first minute that same call better be a foul in the last minute or second.

Let the players decide the game is just a way if saying I don't want to make the tough and right call and be the deciding factor in the game. Well, if you don't make that call you are the deciding factor in the game.

Now, your judgement of what a foul is may be an entirely different issue. That's another discussion thread.

No one says officiating is easy. You need to make the tough call in the tough situation, especially if you have been calling the same thing a foul all game long. On the other hand, if you have been letting the same thing go all game let it go in the last ten seconds also.

Everyone wants a consistant game and that is what everyone should get.

Re: too much communication?
 

Michael Dukakis.

Re: Re: too much communication?
 

Nope. Helen Keller.

As far as letting the players decide the game.

I agree. They decide it in the first minute and the last. If you call a foul in the first minute that same call better be a foul in the last minute or second.

Let the players decide the game is just a way if saying I don't want to make the tough and right call and be the deciding factor in the game. Well, if you don't make that call you are the deciding factor in the game.
____________________________________

First, I don't believe that you mean that if I make a call early in the game and, upon reflection, decide that call was a poor one, that I should continue to make the same poor call for the rest of the game for the sake of consistency. And when I say poor call, I am not talking about a blown call. I am thinking of a call that might have been a call/no call situation, or a too-quick-call on a meaningless hand check, etc.

Second, there is often a period of time during a game when I need to adjust to the flow, rhythm, skill level, etc. Perhaps I officiated a rec league game one day and a high school game the next. Sometimes I can make the transition immediately, other times it might take a couple of trips up and down the court to get into the groove. Also, no matter how much I talk about in pre-game, there are officials with whom it is more difficult to work because of style differences. It can take some time for that "silent negotiation" to occur to settle into a pattern by which we will "agree" to call the game. I have worked in games where everything went smoothly and consistently from the get-go, but they are the exception and not the rule.

All of this has nothing to do with willingness to make the right call. It is about the typical adjustments that are made during many games.

PS How do you use the quoting feature that puts in the bold face and the cool lines and include who posted the original comment?

[Edited by Rick Durkee on Nov 18th, 2004 at 09:13 AM]

Re: Re: Re: too much communication?
 

I don't see a smiley face, JR, but I think you're joking. I'm pretty sure that it was Dukakis (before he ran for President).

But what do I know, eh tomegun? :) (I was just looking for an excuse to use that line!)

Re: Re: Re: Re: too much communication?
 

According to google you're about a century and a half off.

http://www.askhagatha.com/modules.ph...rticle&sid=346

btw, did you get my email?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: too much communication?
 

Huh, I googled, but didn't come up with anything. I can live with George Eliot.

And yeah, I got the email. I'll get back to you on it in a minute.