Exhumed Question from the Dead File

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by M&M Guy
How do you handle it if you're the "junior" of the crew, and your partner is the R?

If I'm a lot junior and I'm not the R, then I may have to back down, but I will let him know that he's hanging himself. I'm not going to sell him out to the coach, but I'm not sticking up for him, either.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
If the calling official still absolutely insists that they made the correct call,you're telling me that you're still gonna overrule them on the floor anyway?

There is no rules basis or mechanism-in NCAA or FED rules- that will allow any official to overrule another official if that official doesn't wanna be overruled.

JR, I hate to say this, but I think you're still missing the boat here. Nobody's talking about over-ruling a call. We're talking about administration/enforcement after a correct call.

[ShadowStripes]

Thank you, Chuck. I cannot seem to get across the point penalty administration differs tremendously from the actual call on the floor. There is no way on God's Green Earth that the rule book or a supervisor/evaluator would intend for the incorrect administration of a penalty to occur simply beacuse one crew member stuubornly refuses to listen to reason, despite complete and accurate knowledge to the contrary by the rest of the crew. Now, I understand the possibility exists that stubborn person might actually be the referee of the game, but as I said, if he/she is the referee, there will be consequences if they are incorrect. With that said, as the R in a crew, I may screw something up in my game, but it sure as heck won't be a failure to change an error in penalty administration because of an obstinate crew member.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

JR, I hate to say this, but I think you're still missing the boat here. Nobody's talking about over-ruling a call. We're talking about administration/enforcement after a correct call.

Chuck, the enforcement is part of the call. You can't overrule that part of the call either if the calling official doesn't wanna be overruled. The calling official may be wrong as hell, but that's his problem if he's not gonna listen to his partner(s) and enforce it correctly. You just tell him what you think. If he still ain't gonna listen to you, then what exactly are you then gonna do? Have a big argument or fight out on the court? The bottom line is that if the calling official is absolutely sure that he's enforcing it correctly, then you can't overrule him. If he doesn't wanna give up the call, you can't make him- no matter how wrong he is. You sort it out after the game. Whoever was right is gonna be the survivor ultimately anyway.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ShadowStripes
Thank you, Chuck. I cannot seem to get across the point penalty administration differs tremendously from the actual call on the floor. There is no way on God's Green Earth that the rule book or a supervisor/evaluator would intend for the incorrect administration of a penalty to occur simply beacuse one crew member stuubornly refuses to listen to reason, despite complete and accurate knowledge to the contrary by the rest of the crew. Now, I understand the possibility exists that stubborn person might actually be the referee of the game, but as I said, if he/she is the referee, there will be consequences if they are incorrect. With that said, as the R in a crew, I may screw something up in my game, but it sure as heck won't be a failure to change an error in penalty administration because of an obstinate crew member.

Oh, don't worry, the supervisor/evaluator will take care of it. If the official is that dumb and stubborn, then he's probably done his last game at that level for a while. Meanwhile, jmo but I really don't think that a supervisor/evaluator wants to see his officiating crew having a major argument amongst themselves out on the floor- and holding up the game while they do so. Especially when the calling official is still adamantly insisting that he's got the call right.

I think that you people might be forgetting what this one was all about from the start. You've got an official here that's telling his partner "I don't care what you say. I'm right and you're wrong". Now you aren't gonna change his mind. And I think that you're both gonna look awful stoopid telling the table two completely different things. So, when it gets this bad, you really don't have any choice but to let your partner hang himself.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Chuck, the enforcement is part of the call.

Nope, I'm just not buying that at all. I can't see any reason at all for saying that. You have an infraction and a penalty. You can correctly indicate the infraction and incorrectly administer the penalty. I just don't see that they must be treated as the same "call".

You can't overrule that part of the call either if the calling official doesn't wanna be overruled.

I will just say again that if I'm the R and we're not supposed to shoot FTs, then we're not shooting FTs period.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

It would be very hard for me to walk away from this and shoot 1-and-1, especially if it's a close game. Especially if I'm the R. If I'm the R, we're not shooting FTs, period. I can't see how knowingly shooting unmerited FTs enhances our credibility.

And if we do shoot the 1-and-1, I'm going to be looking very closely for an offensive lane violation . . .

[tomegun]

I've been told the PC way to handle this is to say something like "for the record I think we should do...."

Now, if someone wants to come to me before I report and get me to change something I will change it if I feel like it is correct. Otherwise I have been known to let an idiot that didn't blow a whistle go report something they didn't have in the first place. Ridiculous but true.

If I'm the R I hope I'm not working with two pushovers that will just allow me to tell them what we are going to do. I would ask both what they think and say what I think. Hopefully we could come to an agreement. Telling them what we are going to do could have a negative effect on their game from that point on. It shouldn't be that way but it is.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
You have an infraction and a penalty. You can correctly indicate the infraction and incorrectly administer the penalty. I just don't see that they must be treated as the same "call".

I will just say again that if I'm the R and we're not supposed to shoot FTs, then we're not shooting FTs period.

[/B]

Whatinthe hell difference does it make what verbiage you use? Does it really matter whether you're trying to overrule a screwed-up "infraction" or a screwed up "penalty"? Lah me! I'm saying that you can't overrule either if the calling official doesn't want to be overruled and refuses to be overruled.

In this play, you're telling your partner "I'm overruling your call!". Your partner now tells you "Like F**K you are!". When he's completely adamant out on the floor that his call is right, there's nothing else you can do but tell him that he's hanging himself and then go with him.

Play: Your partner's administering a throw-in. Defender reaches over the OOB line and knocks the ball out of the thrower's hands. Your partner says "delay of game"(proper call) and then tells the scorer to put a team warning in the book. You say "Whoa, that's a T". Partner says "Nope, you're fulla sh*t". You're telling me, Chuck, that your call is gonna end up prevailing- even though it may be completely 110%() right- if your partner(the calling official) absolutely refuses to change his call? How you gonna do that? Karate-chop him unconscious and then change his call?

Chuck, I know exactly what you're trying to say. All I'm trying to say is that you're in a completely unique situation here- one where crew unity has already gone right down the ol' sh*tter. If you happen to run into someone that dumb and hardheaded, you're better to "oh well" it and get the game out of way asap--and deal with it after the game--rather than have a screaming match out on the floor between your partner and yourself.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Whatinthe hell difference does it make what verbiage you use?

Look, you're saying 2-6 applies. And all I'm saying is that it doesn't. We're not talking about a call.

Does it really matter whether you're trying to overrule a screwed-up "infraction" or a screwed up "penalty"?

Yes, it obvious does matter. Say my partner calls a travel on a borderline jumpstop. I'm not going to run in and tell my partner, "Hey, that wasn't really a travel". But if he says, "Travel! 2 shots!", you better believe I'm going to go to him and set him straight. There is a HUGE difference between the call and the enforcement.

All I'm trying to say is that you're in a completely unique situation here- one where crew unity has already gone right down the ol' sh*tter. If you happen to run into someone that dumb and hardheaded, you're better to "oh well" it and get the game out of way asap

I don't know. If crew unity is already gone, wouldn't it be better to get it right?

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
And if we do shoot the 1-and-1, I'm going to be looking very closely for an offensive lane violation . . .

You know, this isn't a bad solution. I might just administer the FT so that he catches it outside the semi-circle.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Look, you're saying 2-6 applies. And all I'm saying is that it doesn't. We're not talking about a call.

Yes, it obvious does matter. Say my partner calls a travel on a borderline jumpstop. I'm not going to run in and tell my partner, "Hey, that wasn't really a travel". But if he says, "Travel! 2 shots!", you better believe I'm going to go to him and set him straight. There is a HUGE difference between the call and the enforcement.

I don't know. If crew unity is already gone, wouldn't it be better to get it right?

qq]qq

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Yes, it obvious does matter. Say my partner calls a travel on a borderline jumpstop. I'm not going to run in and tell my partner, "Hey, that wasn't really a travel". But if he says, "Travel! 2 shots!", you better believe I'm going to go to him and set him straight. There is a HUGE difference between the call and the enforcement.

[/B]

Here's where we're having our failure to communicate.

True. I agree completely with what you've said and what you're doing.

But.... you still haven't extrapolated it far enough. Now whatinthehell do you do when you've just set him straight and he still says "Chuck, you're wrong. It's my call and I'm giving him 2 shots"? Or in the example that I used before, he says "Chuck you're wrong. I'm not giving 2 shots for a delay-of-game T. I'm giving them an official warning instead". What do you do when the calling official is absolutely adamant that he was right and also absolutely adamant that he ain't gonna change his call? Are you just gonna sit there trading "you're right- you're wrong"s with him until the sun cools and the earth collapses in on itself? Somewhere along the line you just gotta give in and whisper to the guy "Listen MOFO, we'll go with your call and after the game we'll see who's right. Winner gets to referee again some time".

That's the point I'm trying to make. You just can't stand out there arguing with the moron for any real appreciable amount of time. If he really, really wants to hang himself, you can't stop him.

[RookieDude]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I will just say again that if I'm the R and we're not supposed to shoot FTs, then we're not shooting FTs period.[/Quote]

If I may sneak in here between the popcorn eating...

Chuck, I'd be willing to bet my last FOX 40 that even if you were not the R, and FTs were not suppose to be shot, you wouldn't let it happen. That's because you are confident and know the rules. In every crew there is usually a stronger (even if it's just perceived) official...and that official isn't always the R. In my experiences, that official will probably "get his/her way" in a dispute...R or not...because the other official(s) will "give in". (Probably better stated as "concede" untill the locker room)

What you guys are discussing is two hard headed officials that will not give an inch. This is going to be very rare indeed...becuase any official that knows anything, knows this looks terrible.

What you have here is a "filibuster" and it's happening right on the court...now you need a "nuclear option".

I'm going with JR's "nuclear option"...the guy that makes the call, and is continuing into the administration of the call, gets the "nucelar option"...he/she gets to blow the other official(s) out of the water and do it his/her way.

Again, this option is only used if you absolutely cannot change the other officials mind...and as JR stated, there is a rule to back this option.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by RookieDude
[/B]

What you guys are discussing is two hard headed officials that will not give an inch. This is going to be very rare indeed...becuase any official that knows anything, knows this looks terrible.

What you have here is a "filibuster" and it's happening right on the court...now you need a "nuclear option".

I'm going with JR's "nuclear option"...the guy that makes the call, and is continuing into the administration of the call, gets the "nuclear option"...he/she gets to blow the other official(s) out of the water and do it his/her way.

Again, this option is only used if you absolutely cannot change the other officials mind...and as JR stated, there is a rule to back this option. [/B][/QUOTE]Yup, that's basically all that I've been saying. I can't think of any other option being available if the calling official tells you to go screw yourself when you tell him he needs to change his call.