Game management -- finally got it?

[Back In The Saddle]

I had an interesting experience last week that has made me think that maybe I'm starting to get the whole game management thing.

JV boys game, controlled blowout, about 2 minutes left. We have a 1-and-1. Kid misses the first shot, foul on the rebound. Another 1-and-1. Kid misses the first shot, foul on the rebound. Happens again. Happens yet again, only this time we march to the other end to shoot.

Tired of this mess, I step in to admin the free throw and say "Guys, let's go in straight up and see if we can just get out of this, okay?" Well this time the kid bails us out and makes both free throws.

So we throw it in and we're headed the other way then we have a foul out top (I won't call it a reaching foul :P). I whistle it up and fouler looks up at me sheepishly and says, "Sorry, Ref."

I just had to chuckle.

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
I had an interesting experience last week that has made me think that maybe I'm starting to get the whole game management thing.

JV boys game, controlled blowout, about 2 minutes left. We have a 1-and-1. Kid misses the first shot, foul on the rebound. Another 1-and-1. Kid misses the first shot, foul on the rebound. Happens again. Happens yet again, only this time we march to the other end to shoot.

Tired of this mess, I step in to admin the free throw and say "Guys, let's go in straight up and see if we can just get out of this, okay?" Well this time the kid bails us out and makes both free throws.

So we throw it in and we're headed the other way then we have a foul out top (I won't call it a reaching foul :P). I whistle it up and fouler looks up at me sheepishly and says, "Sorry, Ref."

I just had to chuckle.

Of course I didn't see what you saw but when you have 4 rebounding fouls I think you either clean it up before that or have a more patient whistle (advantage/disadvantage) and let them play it out. JV boys can play thru a fair amount of contact. JMO and again, I didn't see what you saw.

Usually in a "blow out", you can manage the game by putting the losing team on the line and passing on fouls that might put the winning team on the line. This keeps the losing team from feeling like it's 5 vs 7, but still don't allow the team that is down to swing away on fouls.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by ChrisSportsFan
Usually in a "blow out", you can manage the game by putting the losing team on the line and passing on fouls that might put the winning team on the line.

You know, I used to feel that way. But now, I really feel that it's better to simply continue calling the game you've called all night. The scrubs from the winning team deserve their FTs just as much as the starters did. They can't help the fact that they only get PT when the game is out of hand.

If the losing team takes exception and does something over-the-top, then deal with it and penalize appropriately. But don't stop blowing the whistle just b/c it's a lopsided game.

JMO.

[icallfouls]

Another point of view. Let's look at it from the team that is getting blown out.

I also submit that the team getting beat is not really wanting to have the game prolonged a great deal by giving them the benefit of the doubt on lessor contact fouls. So to a point it is alright to modify call selection, but also let's not have a parade to FT line so they can feel a like the ref's weren't beating them too.

The fact is that both coaches are likely to understand what is happening, but at the same time they both want the game to end. Winning coach wants to rest their stars, and leave without injury. Losing team wants to put it behind and get ready for the next one. No one likes being on the end of a blowout, so why prolong the result/game.

[Edited by icallfouls on Jun 23rd, 2005 at 07:01 PM]

[JRutledge]

Every game is different. You cannot take a blanket philosophy like this and expect it will always apply. I think the best thing anyone can do is to just call their game and the players will adjust. A couple of fouls here or there are not going to make that much of a difference. Some blowout games need an even quicker whistle than others. Some scrubs are better than other scrubs.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChrisSportsFan
[/B]

Usually in a "blow out", you can manage the game by putting the losing team on the line and passing on fouls that might put the winning team on the line.
[/B][/QUOTE]That's just wrong. And sureashell not very fair either.Why penalize a team for being better than their opponent?

Call it consistently and call it the same at both ends.

We're not supposed to favor one team over another--which basically is what you are recommending above.

[SMEngmann]

I think it depends on the game. If you've got a blowout and a team is getting visibly frustrated, I don't think it hurts to give them the benefit of the doubt on some calls that really don't have any bearing on the outcome of the game, especially if doing so helps ease the tension and better manage the game. I'm not talking about hunting for stuff, just maybe if you have a minor bump on a shot or something that you could pass on, and probably would in a tight game, it may be better for the game to make that call. I think the best way of putting it is quality of calls, calls that take into account the situation in the game.

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Usually in a "blow out", you can manage the game by putting the losing team on the line and passing on fouls that might put the winning team on the line.
[/B]

That's just wrong. And sureashell not very fair either.Why penalize a team for being better than their opponent?

Call it consistently and call it the same at both ends.

We're not supposed to favor one team over another--which basically is what you are recommending above. [/B][/QUOTE]

There's really no reason to read farther that what I typed. I'm not talking about favoring a team by looking for crap that ain't there and I'm sureashell not going to have 4 rebounding fouls on a freethrow. All I'm saying is to bite your whistle and see the whole play and keep the clock running. If you need to call a foul, just keep in mind what the score is. It's not that hard.

[zebraman]

Originally posted by ChrisSportsFan
There's really no reason to read farther that what I typed. I'm not talking about favoring a team by looking for crap that ain't there and I'm sureashell not going to have 4 rebounding fouls on a freethrow. All I'm saying is to bite your whistle and see the whole play and keep the clock running. If you need to call a foul, just keep in mind what the score is. It's not that hard.

I agree Chris. I think people read more into it than what you wrote. It's about having a patient whistle (as we always should) and calling what needs to be called in each game (as we always should).


Z

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by zebraman
I agree Chris. I think people read more into it than what you wrote. It's about having a patient whistle (as we always should) and calling what needs to be called in each game (as we always should).

Since we should always be doing those things, why mention them in regard to a blow-out? I don't really think that's what he was saying. Look at the part I quoted in my previous post. Put the losing team on the line, but pass on fouls that would put the winning team on the line. He was saying don't miss anything on the team that's winning, but let the team that's losing slide a little. I disagree with that at this point in my career.

[zebraman]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Since we should always be doing those things, why mention them in regard to a blow-out? I don't really think that's what he was saying. Look at the part I quoted in my previous post. Put the losing team on the line, but pass on fouls that would put the winning team on the line. He was saying don't miss anything on the team that's winning, but let the team that's losing slide a little. I disagree with that at this point in my career.

In every game we ref, we adjust our calls to the ability level of the teams. A poor team may be affected by slight contact that a good team might be able to play through. If we call a foul for slight contact against the good team, we might be taking a hoop away from them. In a blowout game with two teams of differing abilities, I can understand letting a little more contact go on one end than the other if it isn't affecting the play. Now we still need to manage the game (and the frustration level), but I think there are some games where it is appropriate to slide that line of what "is and isn't a foul" a little bit. Just my opinion and it works for me.... I don't have a problem with an official that continues to call it straight up either.

Z

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Since we should always be doing those things, why mention them in regard to a blow-out? I don't really think that's what he was saying. Look at the part I quoted in my previous post. Put the losing team on the line, but pass on fouls that would put the winning team on the line. He was saying don't miss anything on the team that's winning, but let the team that's losing slide a little. I disagree with that at this point in my career.

Well Chuck, I don't really have a problem with what you're saying but I suppose we can agree that we don't completely agree. ??

[Grail]

[/B][/QUOTE]That's just wrong. And sureashell not very fair either.Why penalize a team for being better than their opponent?

Call it consistently and call it the same at both ends.

We're not supposed to favor one team over another--which basically is what you are recommending above. [/B][/QUOTE]

Unless of course your assignor/evaluator is there and yelling at you after the game that you should have passed on those, or put the losing team on the line.

Not that it ever happened to me, Wednesday night. Not that I took exception to being yelled at for calling a legitimate foul.

Oh well, live an learn.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by ChrisSportsFan

Of course I didn't see what you saw but when you have 4 rebounding fouls I think you either clean it up before that or have a more patient whistle (advantage/disadvantage) and let them play it out. JV boys can play thru a fair amount of contact. JMO and again, I didn't see what you saw.

Usually in a "blow out", you can manage the game by putting the losing team on the line and passing on fouls that might put the winning team on the line. This keeps the losing team from feeling like it's 5 vs 7, but still don't allow the team that is down to swing away on fouls.

It was late in the game, the losing team was frustrated, and they were all "had to get," obvious fouls.

Even though I sympathize with the notion of being more willing to pass on contact against the winning time in a blowout, I'm pretty much with Chuck. Sometimes you introduce an inadvertent side-effect of letting the losing team back into the game. Sometimes you introduce an inadvertent side-effect of letting the winning team get frustrated because they're not getting the calls they should get. Once the scrubs get into the game, especially if they're subbing in wholesale, it's a new game anyway and you need to be taking care of business.

[mick]

Originally posted by zebraman

In every game we ref, we adjust our calls to the ability level of the teams. A poor team may be affected by slight contact that a good team might be able to play through. If we call a foul for slight contact against the good team, we might be taking a hoop away from them. In a blowout game with two teams of differing abilities, I can understand letting a little more contact go on one end than the other if it isn't affecting the play.

Z,
I generally find myself officiating both ends to the level of the better team.
I feel no need to reward poor coaches or weak, unskilled players.
mick