Protect the *Star Player ???

[lrpalmer3]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

Why? Should I be nervous or something?

BTW, I just thumbed through the CCA baseball manual. There's nothing in there that says that....just that umpires should not call unless "free from obligation" and other such stuff. Believe me, I am free from such obligation.

But I've decided to email the assignor and disclose the "conflict" and see what he thinks. My baseball schedule is pretty full and if I end up with two fewer dates it won't be all that awful.

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Feb 21st, 2005 at 01:36 AM] [/B]

Just kidding about keeping your identity secret. CCA Officials' Code of Conduct (basketball, page 10). "Good officials shall: not accept game assignments for any school the official attended, coached at or had any affiliation..."

I could care less about you working the games, just wanted to give you a heads up about what's in the book.

[TerpZebra]

A few thoughts and a game situation from a few years ago:

officials MUST be aware of individual and team fouls, regardless of how you feel about this "star player" treatment. Being aware of these things are what seperate good officials from great officials. This includes: game clock, shot clock, score, team fouls, individual fouls, time outs remaining, etc. The more you know about the game you are officiating, the more apt you are to call a better game. Knowlege is a GOOD thing

siuations:
a few years ago, I was officiating a HS boys varsity game between two small Christian schools. The visiting team was clearly better than the home team, and had 3 or 4 players who understood the game and how to play. The home team had one basketball player (#23) and 4 other people on the court. He was the only kid on the team who could dribble, pass, or shoot. It was a 20 point game in the 3rd quarter and the home team was obviously outmatched. With about 2 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter, one of my partners calls the 4th foul on #23 for the home team. We then have a timeout and I get together with my partners to discuss a few things. I mention that #23 has 4 fouls and is the only reason the game is even reasonable at the moment. I state that it is in the best interest of the game/fans/players/officials if we slow our whistles down with him. If it's an obvious foul, we have to give it to him, but otherwise, let's be a little patient. I never said not to call a foul, just use common sense. U1 nods his head and says ok. U2 is completely disgruntled about this statement and says, "if it's a foul, i'm calling it." First possession out of the timeout for the home team, he has has a marginal handcheck 30 feet from the basket to foul out #23. Game situation says to me that we could've passed on this foul.

Had a JUCO girls game yesterday where the visiting team only had 7 players. One girl had fouled out, and their other big girl (#23) had 4 fouls. Obvious foul on visiting team with two girls (#23 & #22) in the area. I give the foul to #22 (only had 1 foul at the time) and the HOME coach thanked me for not fouling out #23. It would have been a massacre after that.

Not all fouls are black/white. Most of the time, they are dependant on game situation.

but on that note, i did eject the "star" player from a team earlier in the year for a flagrant elbow in the first quarter of a boys varsity game. coach tried to tell me that i needed to be aware that he was the star player and not to eject him. I told the coach that the player himself needed to be aware he was the star player and not flagrantly throw an elbow.

[Edited by TerpZebra on Feb 22nd, 2005 at 11:43 AM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by TerpZebra
I mention that #23 has 4 fouls and is the only reason the game is even reasonable at the moment. I state that it is in the best interest of the game/fans/players/officials if we slow our whistles down with him.

I disagree completely with your philosophy too. Is it in the best interest of the opposing team and their players/fans if you won't call fouls equally on every player on the floor, no matter what team they are on?

On page 10 of the rule book, there is a section called "THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES". Note the words "equal opportunity" and "fair play" contained therein. What you are proposing is contrary to the ideals outlined in that statement. Call it both ways, iow.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by TerpZebra
A few thoughts and a game situation from a few years ago:

officials MUST be aware of individual and team fouls, regardless of how you feel about this "star player" treatment. Being aware of these things are what seperate good officials from great officials. This includes: game clock, shot clock, score, team fouls, individual fouls, time outs remaining, etc. The more you know about the game you are officiating, the more apt you are to call a better game. Knowlege is a GOOD thing

siuations:
a few years ago, I was officiating a HS boys varsity game between two small Christian schools. The visiting team was clearly better than the home team, and had 3 or 4 players who understood the game and how to play. The home team had one basketball player (#23) and 4 other people on the court. He was the only kid on the team who could dribble, pass, or shoot. It was a 20 point game in the 3rd quarter and the home team was obviously outmatched. With about 2 minutes to go in the 3rd quarter, one of my partners calls the 4th foul on #23 for the home team. We then have a timeout and I get together with my partners to discuss a few things. I mention that #23 has 4 fouls and is the only reason the game is even reasonable at the moment. I state that it is in the best interest of the game/fans/players/officials if we slow our whistles down with him. If it's an obvious foul, we have to give it to him, but otherwise, let's be a little patient. I never said not to call a foul, just use common sense. U1 nods his head and says ok. U2 is completely disgruntled about this statement and says, "if it's a foul, i'm calling it." First possession out of the timeout for the home team, he has has a marginal handcheck 30 feet from the basket to foul out #23. Game situation says to me that we could've passed on this foul.

Had a JUCO girls game yesterday where the visiting team only had 7 players. One girl had fouled out, and their other big girl (#23) had 4 fouls. Obvious foul on visiting team with two girls (#23 & #22) in the area. I give the foul to #22 (only had 1 foul at the time) and the HOME coach thanked me for not fouling out #23. It would have been a massacre after that.

Not all fouls are black/white. Most of the time, they are dependant on game situation.

but on that note, i did eject the "star" player from a team earlier in the year for a flagrant elbow in the first quarter of a boys varsity game. coach tried to tell me that i needed to be aware that he was the star player and not to eject him. I told the coach that the player himself needed to be aware he was the star player and not flagrantly throw an elbow.

[Edited by TerpZebra on Feb 22nd, 2005 at 11:43 AM]

I disagree with so many things in this post, it's hard to know where to start. First of all, officials don't "foul players out". Players commit fouls, we just point them out when it happens.

Second, we should only know how many individual fouls there are on a player when that player reaches five. "Keeping players ("star" or not) in the game" is NOT, repeat NOT our responsibility.

Third, we are supposed to call the game the same from beginning to end. Nowhere in any rulebook does it state we call it differently at the end, depending on the score.

Fourth, whether or not a team has a "star player(s)" is totally irrelevant to the way we are supposed to call the game. If we call it properly, the "star" will wind up being the star and the team that plays the best will win because they played the best, not because we called the game improperly.

If a coach ever told me to treat his "star player" differently, I would tell him I am a "star referee" and he should treat me differently - with total silence the rest of the game.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett


Third, we are supposed to call the game the same from beginning to end. Nowhere in any rulebook does it state we call it differently at the end, depending on the score.

I disagree with this philosophy completely.

[davidw]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

I disagree with this philosophy completely.

Dan,

I agree. There is so much we do and don't do in a game that is not "covered in the rule book". In fact, that is one theme that is brought up quite frequently here, and why, as I mentioned before, we do all the other things we do to make ourselves better officials, besides read and study "the rule book".

[ThickSkin]

This can be a very touchy subject (as we all know). I belive that there is the "Letter of the Rule" and "Spirit of the Rule" We all have rule books and there are instances when in previous posts that a "star" player is the only player on the team.

I belive that 99% of the time, I will go with the spirit of the rule and have a slow whistle should a "star" player be in foul trouble or report the foul on someone in the vicinity (post play) rather than have the "star" player sit on the bench.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ThickSkin
This can be a very touchy subject (as we all know). I belive that there is the "Letter of the Rule" and "Spirit of the Rule" We all have rule books and there are instances when in previous posts that a "star" player is the only player on the team.

I belive that 99% of the time, I will go with the spirit of the rule and have a slow whistle should a "star" player be in foul trouble or report the foul on someone in the vicinity (post play) rather than have the "star" player sit on the bench.

You'd give the foul to someone "in the vicinity" rather than give it to the player that actually committed the foul? Just to keep a "star" player in the game?

I give up. I don't even wanna argue with someone that would do something like that. Or referee with them.

[M&M Guy]

I've been reading this for a while, and have run across both sides of this argument in the past. I have always thought the game needs to be called the same - if it's a foul in the last minute, it should be a foul in the first minute. If it's a block under one basket, the similar play should be a block under the other basket.
However...
We use advantage/disadvantage all the time. Contact in a BV game that is easy to let go would definitely be a foul in a 5th grade G game. Should we call the same contact a foul no matter what level, or should there be some allowance for a particular game situation? Likewise, could advantage/disadvantage also apply in this instance? TerpZebra's example of giving a foul to the second player rather than the star is, in my mind, a good example. He didn't say it was obvious who the foul was on, but he was aware of the star's 4th, and called the foul on the other player to keep, in his mind, that team from being put at an (unfair?) disadvantage. His knowledge of the foul count allowed a game to continue a little more fairly. Also, his example of his partner fouling out the player on a hand check sounds like his partner was looking for something after his comment, but we don't know if there had been hand-check fouls called earlier. If so, and it was called the same throughout the game, then the player legitimately fouled out. But, if this was a marginal call, it can make a game situation worse from a coach management standpoint. "Make sure it's obvious" shouldn't be "code" for calling it different for certain players, just a reminder to ourselves to make sure there's no doubt it was a foul. And, yes, that should apply to the first minute as well as the last. Sometimes, we just need to remind ourselves of that.

[davidw]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

On page 10 of the rule book, there is a section called "THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES". Note the words "equal opportunity" and "fair play" contained therein. What you are proposing is contrary to the ideals outlined in that statement. Call it both ways, iow. [/B]

JR,

I grabbed this quote not to specifically address its content, but to ask you another question.

As I have mentioned several times,I am currently re-evaluating my position on this whole matter. My question is, as I'm fairly certain you have found yourself in the situation where a partner(s)has brought the "4th foul" on "so and so" to your attention, whether in pre-game or on the court, how have you handled that? What has been your reply to them, in pregame and on the floor?

As I have had this happen many times, I am contemplating how I might deal with those situations were I in your position or if I was to alter my philosophy such that it would be more in line with that which you promulgate.

David

[lrpalmer3]

Protecting the star player is NBA philosophy. I happen to like the NBA philosophy, but I am careful about how I interject it in my games.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by davidw
[BMy question is, as I'm fairly certain you have found yourself in the situation where a partner(s)has brought the "4th foul" on "so and so" to your attention, whether in pre-game or on the court, how have you handled that? What has been your reply to them, in pregame and on the floor? [/B]

Yes, I have heard this more than just a few times. My reply usually is something along the lines of "Yeah - and if he fouls again that will make five".

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by davidw

My question is, as I'm fairly certain you have found yourself in the situation where a partner(s)has brought the "4th foul" on "so and so" to your attention, whether in pre-game or on the court, how have you handled that? What has been your reply to them, in pregame and on the floor?

[/B]

Call it both ways.

[davidw]

Originally posted by lrpalmer3
Protecting the star player is NBA philosophy. I happen to like the NBA philosophy, but I am careful about how I interject it in my games.

I don't like the use of the term "star player" as it relates to our overall topic of discussion. I prefer "starters"

And while I've limited my use of "protectionism" to a very narrow set of circumstances, which have shown themselves to arise very rarely, (ie. two teammates appearing to foul an opponent at approx. the same time that instead of calling a multiple foul, the teammate without the 4th foul is judged to have committed the first foul, the natural by-product of which, allows the starter to remain in the game with hopes that a better played game is enjoyed by all.)

All that said, I never limit this application to any one player--"Star"--nor to one team. When I have applied it, and near as I can recall, that has been maybe less than 1/2 doz. times in over 30 years, it has been to any starter on either team. Also, I am willing to cease even this application if, in my heart of hearts, I feel it is unfair. I have not positioned myself to stubbornly maintin this philosophy without regard to input from others--especially those I respect.

The subject continues to turn over and over in my mind as I attempt to examine all sides.

Thanks for all the input of many of you on this board.

David

[bigzilla]

Whether right or wrong, I don't think you can watch a weekend of D-1 games on TV and not think that this philosophy is at play. It seems that often the player with 4 fouls doesn't get called on similar action that let to the fouls 1-4, or gets a pass on the 5th, which goes to his teammate that was in on the action.