Devils' advocate then
 

Alright, then a different slant. How many times have you called an intentional foul for someone grabbing a shirt?

That's why the thread was started as "unusual" calls, not missed calls.

Thanks
David

The key here to me is the fact this isn't any player with ball control driving to the basket. This is a dead ball holding foul where the defender is apparently attempting to deny the offensive player from getting open to receive a pass.

In my interpretation of the rules, as they are written, this is <b>NOT</b> the intended situation of when to call an intentional foul. If this was the case, then JR, every off-the-ball holding foul call should be an intentional foul.

Btw, if officials never questioned each other, would any of us get any better?

How many times have you called an intentional foul for someone grabbing a shirt?

[/B][/QUOTE]Just about every time. It's a deliberate act and it is not a legitimate attempt at defense. Usually don't have to call it a second time in the same game either.

Note that this doesn't mean that I second-guess my partner(s) if they don't call it. Usually I'm watching my area on a throw-in, not their's, and I try to respect their judgement too.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 21st, 2005 at 03:55 PM]

Actually, if the thrower has the ball, it is a live ball foul, but a scenario.

Close game. A2 is throwing in to A1 who is streaking downcourt, beating the defender. Defender grabs A1's jersey to prevent the break-away. Is that merely a holding call?

You may want to review NFHS rule 6-1-2(b) as to when the ball becomes live on a throw-in. If it was a "dead ball holding foul", by definition it would have to an intentional or flagrant technical foul(R4-19-5c).

Not every off-ball holding foul involves the deliberate grabbing of the shirt by a defender. If it does, you maywant to read rule 4-19-3 too re:"to neutralize an opponent's obvious advantageous position" <b>or</b> "contact away from the ball or not playing the ball". Your interpretation of the rules seem to differ from the rulebook's interpretation of the rules. It is still up to your judgement as to whether you think an intentional foul should be called on this play or not, but don't try to say that the rules do not support an intentional foul being called.

Re: Devils' advocate then
 

1645 times in 26 seasons. I keep track.

How many times have I had a partner question my call? 0.

Actually, I made a mistake in my previous post. If the official had already placed the ball at the disposal of the offensive player for the throw-in, this wouldn't be a dead ball foul. We weren't given this part of the situation.

However, the game situation didn't present itself for this to be an appropriate time to use the intentional foul rule. Common sense should tell any competent official as much. Yes, we are to enforce the rule book when we're working a game. However, if we don't know how to use common sense (knowing the game/situation), our odds of interpreting and enforcing the rule book correctly aren't very good.

As for rule support, I never said there wasn't rule support to call an intentional foul.

To use one of your previous comments "is grabbing a shirt accidental or intentional", let's use that statement for the following: anytime a post player places his knee in his/her opponents butt, you could call an intentional foul, cause it's very unlikely his knee ended up in the butt by accident.


[Edited by RollTide on Feb 21st, 2005 at 04:28 PM]

I'm not touching that one.....

Are you intimating that your "common sense" is better than my "common sense"? Or that your "common sense" is better than the "common sense" of everybody and anybody that might happen to disagree with you on this call? You're certainly saying that your "common sense" is better than the "common sense" of the official who was right on the spot and made the intentional foul call in the game.

Are you also intimating that I'm not a "competent official" if I don't happen to agree with your "common sense"?

Your <b>opinion</b> on this call didn't come down from the mount. It's your <b>opinion</b> only, not gospel. I'm giving you my opinion as to how this play <b>maybe</b> should be called. What's kinda bothering me is someone saying that the official above was completely wrong when that someone never saw the call, and the rules also say that an "intentional" foul may have been the appropriate call. I don't like second-guessing my fellow officials in cases like this. That's just me though. You do what you have to do.

Btw, the odds of an official interpreting and enforcing the rules correctly are much greater when an official actually knows the rules in the first place- i.e. when the ball becomes live on a throw-in. :D

I'm simply replying to a post made by an official that was right there on the spot and apparently questioned his fellow official that had used his own 'common sense and rules knowledge' to make the call he did.

The situation that was presented by David would lead me to believe that his partner erred in choosing to call an intentional foul.

I assume you've never been on the floor with a partner who blew a call that made a big difference in the outcome (potential outcome) of a game. From listening to your posts, I'm sure none of your partners have ever questioned any of your calls either, cause you seem to be a perfect official.

Most of us aren't perfect officials, contrary to all beliefs. Those of us that aren't won't ever be perfect if the perfect officials won't help us out and let us know when we've handled a situation incorrectly.

From my understanding we are to support our fellow officials while we're on the court during the game. We're never supposed to sell them out during the game. However, once the game is over and we are off the floor, would this not be the time to question our fellow officials hoping it will lead to each of us getting better?

In fact, we're encouraged to go in after each game and instead of patting each other on the back and telling each other about what a great job we just did, we're encouraged to pick out at least 3 plays/situations that occurred during the game and ask each other what we saw. We do this to give immediate feedback on whether we handled the play the best it could've been handled, or if one of our partners knows of a better way to handle it.

1) Oh? I thought we were talking about an offcial that made a call on a throw-in that he was administering, and one of his partners that had no business watching a throw-in that was out of his primary was questioning that call. Now if he was watching it, why would his view and judgement of the play from 30 feet away be better than his partner? The calling official gave his reasons for making the call after the game. You're saying that the "common sense and rules knowledge" of the official that made the call was crappy, and you <b>still</b> haven't seen the call or talked to the calling official about it. The "situation as presented by David" might be a completely different situation if presented by the guy who made the call. Well, I never saw the call either. That's why I always give the benefit of the doubt to the official that made the call.

2)Pray tell how you can be so sure then that a call that you never saw was so definitely wrong? A call that you never have discussed with the calling official either? How can you be so sure the guy was wrong, especially when the official that made the call thought that he did have the right call? The calling official explained after the game what he called. The calling official then gave his rationale for what he called. Maybe that not good enough for you, but that's good enough for me. I've got more respect for my fellow offcials than to second-guess them that badly. Especially when I didn't see the call, or if I saw it from 30 feet away when the guy calling it was right there.

We disagree.

Apparently you aren't seeing that the official that was there was questioning his partners call. He described the situation in question, and I agree with his interpretation of how the rules seemed to have been misinterpreted and enforced erroneously. I'm basing my opinion on the situation from the way David relayed it to this board.

From the situation as it was presented to this board, I'm glad I wasn't the calling official's partner that night, because, in my opinion, yes, the entire group looks bad after that kind of call.

I was calling a state playoff game this past Friday night. One of my partners is considered to be the best official by many around this part of the state. He was the R and conducted our pregame session. One of the final statements he made before we hit the floor was this: "We're not going to put any 'crap' in the game". He then explained exactly what this statement meant to us. He said, we don't want to call anything that we're going to have a hard time explaining to a coach (especially if the game is going down to the wire and it's crunch time).

Learn the game situations, learn what you should be looking for. Once you get familiar with these 2 basic parts of officiating, your games will go a lot smoother and you'll be recognized by your peers as a solid referee, one they will not hesitate to go on the floor with at any time.

1) You're basing your opinion on an official that was watching the play from miles outside his primary. You're dumping all over a fellow official without even seeing the call he made or hearing his explanation of the call. Imo, whether you like or agree with it, anyone that does something as unprofessional as that can make also make an entire group look bad.

2) You might be have a little more credibility preaching about "basics parts of officiating" if you hadn't already shown me that you don't really have a basic grasp of the rules yourself--i.e. "dead ball holding fouls". Iow, please don't talk down to me about what I need to learn.

As I said, we just disagree. Shrug.

If I never made calls that coaches didn't understand I would never make any calls.

When you start using whether or not a coach would have a hard time understanding a call as your major criteria for how you make calls, you might as well just sit on the bench with him and ask permission to make your calls.

If a partner ever said this to me I would smack him upside the head.

Not quite correct
 

This has been blown a little out of proportion.

#1 - it wasn't 30 feet away and it wasn't necessarily out of my primary. The throw in was FT line extended. The call was made on a player on the blocks. If there was a call to be made it should have been made by the lead. (this is three man mechanics)

After we hand the ball to the thrower we are required to watch the action which in this situation was in the direction of the violation.

#2 - you didn't answer my question about would you call an intentional foul on a player who grabs another player while their are jostling for position on a throw in?

that was my question to start with. I personally think it was a very bad call. A simple foul would have been the better call in that situation because it doesn't fit the criteria for an intentional foul.

#3 - this was a very unusual call as I stated to start with. Obviously no one else has made the same call because they would have stated it.

Finally - if we can't critique out partners then why are we officials at all. Simply accept everything at face value, call your primary area and go home.

I don't play that game. This play could have affected the game, and it was so unusual that the coach nearly got a T for arguing. Surely we as officials are a team, but at that point in the contest, I was ready to find a hole to crawl in - it was that bad.

There was no way to explain the call to the coach because it made no sense, so I had to let the guy who called it explain it.

Anyway, makes a good discussion.

Thanks
David