Protect the *Star Player ???

[davidw]

Originally posted by TimTaylor
What Mark said.......

And yes, I have called a multiple foul...once I think in the last 5 years. The requirements for a true multiple foul are pretty tight & rarely occur - usually one player clearly fouls before the other, which makes the ball dead and any subsequent contact is ignored unless it is judged intentional or flagrant.

Again, out of curiosity, at what level did you call that multiple foul and additionally, how was it received by coach, fans, partner(s) and any other in attendance witnessees?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by davidw

In HS and college, you should assume that each player has put in the same amount of effort and dedication as his teammates, and to show favoritism to one over the other because he is "more skilled" is flat out wrong. That should never be a factor in making a call of this nature. [/B]

But in all other organized games, ie. AAU, Y, even pros. we should assume this is not the case? Either you argument covers them all or none.
[/B][/QUOTE]David, take the NBA right out of this discussion. The NBA is geared for entertainment, and the rules are set up to mesh with that entertainment, with their relaxed stances on travelling, palming, etc. The NBA rules philosophy basically has nothing in common with the other rulesets- NFHS, NCAA and FIBA.

Mark's point, which I fully agree with, is valid for all rules outside the NBA. You're favoring one team over another with your philosophy, and that's just about the worst thing an official can do. Coaches and players can live with bad officiating; they can't live with unfair officiating.

[davidw]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

But in all other organized games, ie. AAU, Y, even pros. we should assume this is not the case? Either you argument covers them all or none.
[/B]

David, take the NBA right out of this discussion. The NBA is geared for entertainment, and the rules are set up to mesh with that entertainment, with their relaxed stances on travelling, palming, etc. The NBA rules philosophy basically has nothing in common with the other rulesets- NFHS, NCAA and FIBA.

Mark's point, which I fully agree with, is valid for all rules outside the NBA. You're favoring one team over another with your philosophy, and that's just about the worst thing an official can do. Coaches and players can live with bad officiating; they can't live with unfair officiating.

[/B][/QUOTE]

You are saying it is automatically unfair. So far I'm not sure I believe it is-- in the scenario I have mentioned. It's application is very limited. I would call it at one end the same as the other.

As far as my comment that his argument covers them all or none, I was referring to his point that we must assume all teammates are equal at the high school and college level regarding their dedication etc. Not to anything else.

I truly do not believe this philosophy is patently unfair. But then, I am still mulling it over.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by davidw
I truly do not believe this philosophy is patently unfair. But then, I am still mulling it over.

David, I really can't see how you can state favoring one player over another isn't unfair. It seems pretty straightforward to me.

Using the rationale that a "more skilled player" deserves special treatment is contrary to my beliefs. How about we give special treatment to the most affluent player? That would be more in line with what America is all about.

[totalnewbie]

(1) Do your association, camp instructors, district coordinators, etc. teach you to protect the star players?

(2) Do they teach you to try to keep the star players in the game (from fouling out)?

(3) Do they teach you to know when any teams key players have four fouls and make sure your parnters are aware of it too?

(4) Do any of you have any practical philosophy concerning this you would be interested in sharing with this board?

1. For goodness sake, no.
2. Heck no.
3. No, but we are cognizant of whether or not a player has 4 fouls. On the 5th foul, that player is disqualified and there are very particular steps that have to be taken in a DQ situation. For that reason, it is good to know when a DQ might come up. But it isnt relevant to "star" status. I agree with the prior post that I dont want my foul that is a DQ on a player to be a call I wish I had back, but that pertains to any player's 5th, not just to alleged "star" players.
4. See above.

"Protect the star" is just not something that is taught, or not that I have ever heard. Now I'm not working BV games, but they dont have special meetings I dont attend and I have sat in on many of their pregames and never once heard a varsity crew say "make sure you dont foul out star player" or anything even remotely close to that. The only thing I have heard officials say is "see what you call and call what you see."

Frankly, to the extent I personally watch score or time or fouls it is situational and to anticipate possible future plays or situations (possible upcoming end of game timeouts after a score, possible intentional fouls, score getting lopsided so game might get chippy, knowing we are at 6 fouls so the next is 1 and 1, etc).

But I'm just a newbie, so what do I know

Hope that helps.

Clark

[davidw]

Originally posted by Mark Padgett

David, I really can't see how you can state favoring one player over another isn't unfair. It seems pretty straightforward to me.

Using the rationale that a "more skilled player" deserves special treatment is contrary to my beliefs. How about we give special treatment to the most affluent player? That would be more in line with what America is all about.

Mark,

Don't know who the more affluent player(s) are. I guess it may be how we define "special treatment" and whether that special treatment we dole out is patently unfair. I guess my position is tied to what I believe we do almost from the moment we walk on the floor. We use our judgement. Do we pass on that; do we enforce this; does doing this make for a better game--for all; is the game make better or worse if I do this, or don't do that?

My use of the "call" is very limited (possible multiple foul sitch involving starter with 4 fouls and teammate with less).

When the fact is presented in a game to me, whether noted by myself or pointed out to me by a partner, that so & so 'starter' has 4 fouls, I take that as the reminder that we want to use our judgement to make sure we don't make the call most of us might pass on most of the time. The reminder about the patient whistle. When the air hits the whistle and it's too late to call it back and we know that was not a great call--none of us likes to be there. The "4 foul notice" is most of the time just one of other opportunities to remind oneself not to get "there".

I find this discussion interesting from one other aspect. I have reviewed where and when I developed this philosophy. It obviously came after I moved up to varsity level games quite some years ago. It came after working with a fair number of "upper level" officials who passed it on to me. There take on it seemed to be more liberal in its application. I have kept my application limited to the situation described. And it is still part of the position of many fellow officials I work with today. Not that any of that makes it right. In fact, If your position is right and mine wrong (and just who gets to decide that? ) then your challenge of mine holds great merit in de-mything this too often applied philosophy.

Still mulling.
David

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by davidw

[/B]

I truly do not believe this philosophy is patently unfair. [/B][/QUOTE]We disagree totally and completely. End of story.

[davidw]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

I truly do not believe this philosophy is patently unfair. [/B]

We disagree totally and completely. End of story. [/B][/QUOTE]

JR,

Why did you edit out the fact that I mentioned I was still "mulling it over" as in, I see merit in your arguement and am considering whether I should alter mine?

If you are going to quote me, I believe you have responsibility to do so accurately. To leave off the next sentance which greatly impacts the meaning of the previous, I believe, misinterprets my position.

I've follwed this board enough to know I value your opinion. I may not always agree, as is all our prerogative, but I do respect it.

Put back into your quote of me: "But I'm still mulling it over." and your "End of Story" conclusion loses its impact, imo.

Still, thanks for your response, I gives me pause to think.

David

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by davidw

We disagree totally and completely. End of story. [/B]

JR,

Why did you edit out the fact that I mentioned I was still "mulling it over" as in, I see merit in your arguement and am considering whether I should alter mine?

If you are going to quote me, I believe you have responsibility to do so accurately. To leave off the next sentance which greatly impacts the meaning of the previous, I believe, misinterprets my position.

I've follwed this board enough to know I value your opinion. I may not always agree, as is all our prerogative, but I do respect it.

Put back into your quote of me: "But I'm still mulling it over." and your "End of Story" conclusion loses its impact, imo.

Still, thanks for your response, I gives me pause to think.

David [/B][/QUOTE]I took you at your exact word, David. You said "I truly do not believe this philosophy is patently unfair". Well, I truly believe that your philosophy is completely unfair. You're entitled to your opinion and I respect your right to have that opinion. I don't agree with your opinion or philosophy however, and never will. End of story. No animus involved.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I have a very true story from my early years as a women's college basketball official. Back in the good old days of AIAW, NAGWS, and blue/white striped shirts, blue pants, shorts, or coulottes, and white shoes, I attended the University of Miami (Florida) and dated a girl on the women's basketball team. Ethics precluded me from officiating UM. I would never accept an assignment to officiate UM at home, but at least four to six times a year I would officiate them on the road, back then a college's AD hired the officials for its home games. And I was hired by the schools even though they knew I was attending UM and my sister was playing golf for UM. More often than not UM would lose and the UM players thought that I was too fair as an official. But I remember one UM game on the road when my girl friend fouled out and I called ALL five fouls on her. Needless to say, she did not talk to me for about three days.

MTD, Sr.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
... back then a college's AD hired the officials for its home games. And I was hired by the schools even though they knew I was attending UM and my sister was playing golf for UM.

If you hadn't said that your sister played golf, I'd have been fine with this. But how could you possibly be impartial with your sister playing golf for your school? I can't imagine any AD being okay with that.

[Daryl H. Long]

Maybe I am missing something here so help me out.

First, If the "philosophy" davidw is perpetuating is if two players of team A foul a B player at nearly the same time the we should call the foul on the player with less fouls to keep "the star" player in the game then I have to agree with JR and others that even the slightest hint I favor star players in administering the rules of the game nullifies my integrity as being an unbiased observer of the game.

As JR said, just call the foul on the player who fouled FIRST. If it is a 5th foul on a star player then so be it.

Secondly, I can not see how multiple foul in the above situation benefits a player with four fouls. BOTH would be charged with a personal foul. And to make matters worse if both players had 4 fouls BOTH would foul out.

[TimTaylor]

Originally posted by davidw

Again, out of curiosity, at what level did you call that multiple foul and additionally, how was it received by coach, fans, partner(s) and any other in attendance witnessees?

Freshman boys, both pretty good teams. The situation was similar to what Jurassic postulated...end of game situation, A down by one. A1 gets a pass at the elbow, turns & shoots - B1 & B2 both going hard at A1 from opposite sides sandwich him between them as he's taking the shot at what appeared to be the exact same instant. They were sorta trying for the block, and the contact wasn't quite severe enough to call the intentional or flagrant, so I went with the multiple instead. Basket was good (how I'm still not quite sure.....), putting A up by one.

Obviously when I reported it coach B wanted an explanation so I quickly got both coaches together & briefly explained the call - took maybe 15 seconds. Their response was basically "Oh, OK..." My partner was a first year - only his 5th or 6th game. He looked a little confused, so I told him to just trust me, then we administered the two free throws (one for each foul). A1 missed both & B got the rebound, but couldn't get a shot off in time.

Afterwards in the locker room I dug out the books & went over it with my partner.

As for the fans & any other nonparticipants in the gym, I don't pay any attention to them and couldn't care less how they perceived it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Daryl H. Long

Secondly, I can not see how multiple foul in the above situation benefits a player with four fouls. BOTH would be charged with a personal foul. And to make matters worse if both players had 4 fouls BOTH would foul out.

Daryl, David's philosophy is that you deliberately do not call a multiple foul in these situations. You call one foul only, and you always call it on the non-star. The star is allowed to skate. As I said, it's not very fair to the other team imo.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I have a very true story from my early years as a women's college basketball official. Back in the good old days of AIAW, NAGWS, and blue/white striped shirts, blue pants, shorts, or coulottes, and white shoes,

Please don't do that again. The image of you running down the floor in your baby-blue coulottes just flashed through my head. I temporarily went blind. Thank goodness.