Worked a girls JV/Varsity double header last night in Illinois. Final score of the JV game was 66-0, home team won. I have never worked a game where a team did not score, not even a 5th or 6th grade game. Only called 3 fouls in the first half as it was also the least physical game I have ever seen. The losing team would actually get out of the way when the opponents would drive to the basket. At least we had the running clock in the 4th quarter. The varsity game didn't start out much better but at least the visitors scored a few minutes into the game. They were down by 29 with a minute to go in the 3rd quarter, but ended up cutting it to 12 by the end of the game against the home teams reserves. Anybody else ever have a shutout in a high school game?

that's one of those games where at half time you're reminding game mgmt to get the V teams ready because there's no need for a 45 minute wait to start the second game. "Folks, it's goin-da be-an early night tonight".

I've had some scoreless quarters, but never a full game. Ouch.

I have worked lower level games where I thought a shutout was possible. I know a lot of you will think this is wrong but I have asked the losing coach if he had anyone that can shoot foul shots. I would then look for a foul to call so that that player could get to the line. I just think it is embarassing to the kids if they get shutout.

That may be considered wrong to some on this board, but I think for the most part officials are compassionate people and would do the same thing. I have definately found fouls to help a team score and even called a T on the winning coach to put someone on the line to score.

Some might object but in the case that you outlined I don't think that there's any harm in trying to get the losing team to the foul line at least to get some points on the board. Slightest touch on the shooter I will send them to the line. I don't think either Coach would mind.

that will probably get you a "hey thanks, good job", from both coaches.

Believe me, if there had been anything close to a foul on the home team we would have called it. The losing team basically just kept throwing up perimeter shots with no pressure from the opponents and missing badly. They virtually never drove to the hoop or tried to pass it inside. On the rare occasions they did try to get a pass to the post, they would throw it out of bounds. They did get to the line a few times but missed every shot.

I hope he did something that might have remotely deserved it!

There was a game around here a couple of years ago that was 94-0. If I remember correctly, the losing team didn't even have 5 players, except to start the game.

I had a game once where the ending score was something like 66-5. The winning team was still pressing in the fourth quarter. They also developed a bad case of the travels.

So I guess it's wrong of me to silently cheer for the shut-out once we get to the second half?

I've got 2 goals in officiating, work the Final 4 and work a shutout.

I hope this is tongue in cheek.

When games get out of hand and the winning team is still pressing it's funny but suddenly more fouls are called on the winning team when they press and they suddenly disappear when they stop. Don't know why that is.

You saying I've got no shot at the Final 4? Thanks!!!!

"Everything I say is tongue and cheek."

-Luther Palmer

It's easy to explain -- even coaches get it although they don't always like it. It's simple advantage/disadvantage. "Coach, when your team is so much better than the other team, any contact at all gives you a tremendous advantage. So if it's illegal contact, I've got to call it. On the other hand, when the other team contacts you, they get no advantage at all. It's gotta be a real hack or slam before I call it." That's the way it is in a mis-match.

Not a shutout, but......
 

There is a note up on I believe Fox Sports about a high school game in Vermont that ended up with a score of 5-2.

Interesting read. No points by either team in the second half. Of course, no shot clock either, but I bet the ref's on that game will have a few stories to tell.

My personal best is a high school varsity game that went 36-0 before the visiting team scored. We went more than 8 minutes into the first half without the visitors scoring. After that, the score remained 30 points apart.

goose

It's easy to explain -- even coaches get it although they don't always like it. It's simple advantage/disadvantage. "Coach, when your team is so much better than the other team, any contact at all gives you a tremendous advantage. So if it's illegal contact, I've got to call it. On the other hand, when the other team contacts you, they get no advantage at all. It's gotta be a real hack or slam before I call it." That's the way it is in a mis-match. [/B][/QUOTE]Jmo, but I completely disagree with that whole concept, and I always have. It's not our job to impose our own personal values or beliefs into a ballgame. It's also not part of our job to become judge and jury to pass our own personal judgement on a team, and then become the executioner too. It is our job to call the game fairly and evenly, and keep it under control. What you're doing can, in no way imo, be called officiating a game fairly and evenly. Let the people who run a league decide what they think is fair or not. That's why running clocks, for example, get introduced into the rules. It's their job to make the rules; it's our job to call the rules, even the ones we don't like. If you want to loosen up or tighten up on the contact--fine- but loosen up or tighten up at both ends, not just against one team. Again, jmo.

Jmo, but I completely disagree with that whole concept, and I always have. It's not our job to impose our own personal values or beliefs into a ballgame. It's also not part of our job to become judge and jury to pass our own personal judgement on a team, and then become the executioner too. It is our job to call the game fairly and evenly, and keep it under control. What you're doing can, in no way imo, be called officiating a game fairly and evenly. Let the people who run a league decide what they think is fair or not. That's why running clocks, for example, get introduced into the rules. It's their job to make the rules; it's our job to call the rules, even the ones we don't like. If you want to loosen up or tighten up on the contact--fine- but loosen up or tighten up at both ends, not just against one team. Again, jmo. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree with you to a certain point, but I do think the a/d thing can be reasonably carried out to this extreme. It's very true that we are supposed to keep a game fair, but that doesn't include robotically calling this much contact a foul and that much contact not a foul. It includes judgment as to whether a certain amount of contact creates an illegal disadvantage. WHen a team is very much better than it's opponent, it's much easier to create an advantage that is illegal if it involves illegal contact. I've never made anything up, at all. If the winning team plays clean, I've got nothing, and I"m not calling breathing fouls. If the losing team can't make their shots over legal defense, they get no "help" from me. But especially for travelling and contact, they also get a lot more "consideration" and holding the whistle to see if they gain any advantage. If they're poor enough players to lose in a shutout, they probably can't even foul well!

I did a holiday tournament a few years ago with a new charter school against a pretty good christain school, and because of a scheduling mix up I was working it alone, 55-0 with 2:30 minutes left in the game.

There is no running clock in Arizona, so no luck there. The team that had the next game were coaching from the stands trying to help this team out. I managed to get them to the foul line enough to make the final score 59-3.

I did a 95-14 GV game two years ago. 62-7 at the half and the teams 6'5" player had 40 points at the half.

Jmo, but I completely disagree with that whole concept, and I always have. It's not our job to impose our own personal values or beliefs into a ballgame. It's also not part of our job to become judge and jury to pass our own personal judgement on a team, and then become the executioner too. It is our job to call the game fairly and evenly, and keep it under control. What you're doing can, in no way imo, be called officiating a game fairly and evenly. Let the people who run a league decide what they think is fair or not. That's why running clocks, for example, get introduced into the rules. It's their job to make the rules; it's our job to call the rules, even the ones we don't like. If you want to loosen up or tighten up on the contact--fine- but loosen up or tighten up at both ends, not just against one team. Again, jmo. [/B][/QUOTE]

I certainly respect your opinion. However, when things get out of hand if one team keeps pouring it on no good can possibly come out of this situation. In baseball it would be called "bush". Losing team becomes frustrated and suddenly you have cheap shots. An example was my game last night. Winning team is approaching 30 point lead. Losing team was cameing close to hammering uncontested lay-ups fortunately they didn't. I've been doing this long enough that I can see the direction we are heading and I was prepared to deal with it. The winning team was pressing the whole game but midway through the third quarter the Coach called off the press and things calmed down. If I can help this process along by calling a few more fouls (fouls that normally I may or may not pass on) I'll do it. I might be able to avoid injuries, and the clock keeps running. Just my thoughts on this.

I had a final score of 101-6. I probably would have enjoyed the shutout you had a little more. I even stopped all pressure and double teaming with the agreement of both coaches and it still didn't help. Sometimes you just have to smile and roll with it.