|
Mon Jul 18, 2005, 08:18pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
One quick thought on going topside vs. going low at the slot: if we go low, does that not put one's back or side to some part of our primary (a player, a line of responsibility, or our partner(s) who can no longer see our eyes to ascertain what exactly it is that we are focused on? I would like to hear anyone's opinion who will offer.
|
|
Mon Jul 18, 2005, 09:06pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Z
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 12:12am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 05:32am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Drothamel, I know of at least 7 D-1 conferences on the east coast which teach going top-side versus low-side. I'm not saying that to down HS ball at all. The fact is people officiate HS ball everyday because the assigner has to have a certain number of officials working as opposed to college assigners having people on staff that want to do the right thing for the most part.
Since we are talking about people who want to officiate rather than collecting a check we should dismiss any notion of bailing out. Bailing out is obviously something we shouldn't do, especially from the C. Going low-side: Cuts off your field or "cone" of vision and rotates it away from the basket. Allows you to see space between two players Allows you to see the ball when the dribbler has it on the baseline side of his/her body. Creates a stack on most drives or at least too many to the hole. Creates a possible stack on baseline jumpers. Limits ability to pick up screens that come from the baseline Limits ability to help L with out of bounds call Severely limits ability to get angles on rebounding plays. Going top-side: Opens up your field of vision Allows you to see space between players Allows you to see ball when dribbler has it on the "top" side of his/her body Allows you to make adjustments to get great angles on all drives to the basket Allows you to see space on baseline jumpers Allows you to see screens that come from either side of the player with the ball Increases possibility to help L with out of bounds call on your side of the court Allows you to make adjustments to get angles on rebounding plays Allows you to become T quicker in case of a steal/turnover Mechanically, this is one of the best improvements for 3-man crews in some time. If our goal is to get a higher percentage of calls right going top-side allows us to move towards that goal. This is not a one size fits all thing but it is something that works more than it doesn't.
__________________
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." -- John Wooden
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 05:46am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Goose,
How much experience a 7-year official has varies throughout the country. For that matter, it can vary in the same city! This has little to do with how good an official can be. I think Zack Zarba doesn't have much more experience than that. I guess the NBA thinks he is good enough.  You mentioned a gripe and IAABO. IAABO, enough said.  If your counting, no matter how you do it, has the possibility of hitting a player then your method of counting isn't the problem. While you may not understand the mentality behind some mechanics being put aside I hope you can understand that something must seperate us as officials so we can't all have the same exact mechanics. If your were to "make it" and worked for more than one supervisor what would you do if they wanted different things? If you did a HS game one day and a college game the next day what would you do? Maybe adjust? Game interrupters are something we should all work on. The worst game interrupters are a whole bunch of "and one" plays that could be held. On the flip side, we don't award free-throws enough when a player is beginning the shooting motion. We are quick to yell "on the floor" while the player is shooting the ball. The rule is the same for HS, college and the NBA. We don't do a good job of this. Notice I'm saying "we" which includes myself I would like to know what you mean by "I got my 3-man stuff down." If this is as written then that could be why someone with 7 years has enough experience to be D-1. This official could already have his "3-man stuff down" and is on the fast track moving up. Just some thoughts.
__________________
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." -- John Wooden
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 10:16am
|
|||
|
|||
|
tomegun,
Just a few comments, but please don't take them personally. The knock I had/have with a 7 year official being a clinician at a camp is this. Although his mechanics might be perfect (which they were not), he can't possibly have enough experience. There just isn't enough time to have seen what the 15-20-30 year official has seen. This does not make him a bad official, but I have to wonder about the experience. Again, I'll use the simple analogy of a surgeon. Would you want a doctor operating on you with a few years of experience or one that say, has 30 years with the knife? More often than not, we choose the person with more experience. This does not mean they are necessarily better, but I think experience does count for something and surely in the real working world, experience does count. If it did not, then why is it necessary on every resume? >You mentioned a gripe and IAABO. IAABO, enough said. My gripe or should I say issues are not with IAABO but more with the differences across the boards. >While you may not understand the mentality behind some >mechanics being put aside I hope you can understand that >something must seperate us as officials so we can't all >have the same exact mechanics. I don't agree with this at all. We are to in effect not be seen nor heard. Why would I want to seperate myself from my fellow officials. The issue with a uniform mechanic code is to make us all alike, not seperate us. Why wear the same uniform if we are to seperate ourselves. On the contrary, we are taught, at least I was, that we should all look alike, talk alike, and work alike. No glasses, no overweight, same uniform, etc. So why throw out the mechanics? Why then even have a mechanics manual if we are to seperate ourselves? It sends the wrong message. I was always told that you were to be indistinguishable from your partner, and that you SHOULD NOT stick out. If we all can't have the same mechanics, then throw them out. >If your were to "make it" and worked for more than one >supervisor what would you do if they wanted different >things? If you did a HS game one day and a college game >the next day what would you do? Maybe adjust? This is a bone of contention. As I said, the supervisors have way to much power. They have way to much control and quite frankly, interpret the game through their eyes instead of simply following the rules. FWIW, they have bent over backwards in my opinion to please the coaches. As for HS and college, they are two different games. I would suspect that there would be differences and there are, and these are with the RULES. Mechanics should not differ all that much except when there is a rule difference. Other than that, what right does the college guy have in throwing out the mechanics manual just because he made it? I must confess, it is a sore spot with me. Kind of like smoking. Don't preach to me about the ills of smoking while you are puffing away. Back to the old "do as I say, not as I do." To me it just sends a mixed message. >I would like to know what you mean by "I got my 3-man >stuff down." If this is as written then that could be why >someone with 7 years has enough experience to be D-1. This >official could already have his "3-man stuff down" and is >on the fast track moving up. When I moved, I moved into an area that uses the 3 man system. Coming from an area that was strictly 2 man and having worked 2 man for some 19 years, has some drawbacks. I was thrown into the fire last winter in the 3 man system and ended up making my way through it due to some very forgiving partners. This spring I worked in tournaments every weekend that involved 3 man. I also thought it would be wise in attending a team camp that taught only 3 man, which is regarded as the best HS 3 man camp in the state. Since I needed more work and insight, I decided to attend and I am glad I did. I got my rotations down, and my coverage responsibilites down. Now all I need is more on court experience. That is what I meant when I said I got my 3 man stuff down. As for the fast track to moving up, this assumes that all officals want to move up. Personally, I have passed that point in my life and other things are more important than the almighty schedule. I could care less if I move up at this point in my life. I officiate becasue I like it, not in hopes of moving up. Over the years, I have seen far to many couples split up over moving up. I've seen far to many drink to excess all in the name of moving up. I've seen far to many shuffle their kids off to military or private school while they are away from home 6 nights a week and then wonder why is my kid so rebellious. Cat Steven's "Cat in the Cradle" is a constant reminder of my priorities. Time has passed me. I've had my chances to move up and have turned both of them down. I'm happy where I am at. Of course, this is another bone of contention I have with the general position within the officiating world that says if you don't want to move up, there must be something wrong with you. Yea, I'm happily married and want to stay married. Yea, I'm not an alcoholic and have no intention in becomming one all in the name of moving up. Yea, I want to see my kids more often than peeking in on them while they sleep. So yea, I don't want to move up, nor do I need to move up. I just want to do the best job where I am at, and I can live with that fact. Just some thoughts. Sorry to get off target.
__________________
Referees whistle while they work..
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 10:58am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
You are right in saying there should be uniformity in rules enforcement and mechanics. A team should be able to go to a different area and still expect to play the same game. Mechanics are important because that is our form of communication - a signal that means one thing one place and another somewhere else, means our communication is ineffective. But, in the highly competitive world of moving up the officiating ladder, being different is important. In a camp that has 100 officials competing for a couple of spots on the staff, you have to be a little different to stand out enough to get noticed. Yes, they still want uniformity, to an extent. But, if everyone did everything exactly the same, what would make a supervisor pick you out of the crowd? So, you need to be the same, only different. Some people can do it, many can't.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.)
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 11:03am
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble." ----------------------------------------------------------- Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 01:01pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Goose,
For someone who feels so content with the way he has situated officiating vis-a-vis the rest of his life, you certainly do protest a lot about officiating. Put differently, if officiating as an institution is so rife with problems, and it's not that much of a priority to you to begin with, why do some of these things bother you so much? I still don't get your whole 'experience' argument. When you see five-year guys doing D1, dollars to donuts you're talking about people who have been getting top-level instruction for nearly their entire careers. This is worth years and years of experience. I have worked with countless guys in their early twenties who I would rather work with than some 20-yr vets I know. Practice doesn't make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect. This is not limited to you, but I will ask you why you seem so fixated on signals. If your signals communicate well to everyone, then what's the problem? "Well, the manual says..." "But what about uniformity..." To these I say, so what? If an assignor is content with what you do, and you feel good about how your signals communicate to others, then what, exactly, is the problem? I'll tell you what the answer is at the high school level in my state. Signals are given primacy because the powers that be don't know enough about actually officiating the game to be able to critique on anything but the most cut-and-dried of issues. Thus, approved signals = quality referee. Unfortunately, many of those officials with the "great signals" get exposed for the weak officials they are when post-season play arrives and the play is over their heads. I adapt and do what "they" want me to do, but I still think it's absurd--and does a great disservice to players and coaches--to put more emphasis on the cosmetic than on getting plays correct. One caveat, though, is that I don't think that this is an example of assignors having "too much power." Assignors are what they are: distributors of games (read money), and to varying degrees, prestige. There's always going to be someone who distributes these goods, and to the extent that that's true, there will be some concentration of power. This is at best a problem without a problem, and at worst a problem without a solution. As to your critique of the differences in expectations across assignors, all I can say to that is 'good luck.' Additionally, if you were to try to be progressive about the issue, to whom do you want to give the power to dictate which systems/theories will be given primacy in the standardization of assignors? jb
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 01:13pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
This is a very good topic, and I applaud all those participating for keeping the conversation sincere.
My 2 cents: 1. Clinicians teach you technique, not experience. A 25-year Big East official can learn how to referee SEC ball from a 5-year SEC official. (Insert surgery analogy here) 2. Officials must distinguish themselves without standing out. Sounds strange, but the highest-ranking officials have mastered this subtle technique and I'm working on it. 3. If college presidents, coaches, and fans want the game played a certain way, then I don't have a problem bending the rules in that direction. If I can bend the rules for 8-year-olds when they take an extra step, then I can bend it for college kids. The presidents, coaches, and fans at all levels want to see a clean and fair game, not a lot of whistles. 4. Some guys I know would sell their soul for a D1 game. We all know them. Because we see others taking that path, that doesn't mean that we can't get there and still keep home happy.
__________________
Luther
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 03:58pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Goose, I don't take your comments personally because I've been working more than 7 years. I have also officiated on the west and east coasts. A 3 year guy who wants to work on the east coast equals a 6 year guy on the west coast possibly. This can happen and I'm working with a guy (5 years of experience) tonight who I would work with in any game on any level that I have worked so far.
You are the perfect example of a lot of experience but not a lot of experience in the 3-man system. So this guy could have 6 more years of experience than you in the current system. By the way there are 19 and 20 year olds who attend camps in the SEC system which means by the time they are 7 years into their career they have been instructed by NBA officials for seven years. If you want to blend in and not stand out then I would want to work my first game of camp with you because I will be me with my own style. If you don't want to move up then: 1. Why are you complaining so much about someone who is in D1? 2. Why do you care at all? If you think there is a link between the problems you mentioned and moving up then you must have lived in Mayberry! That is almost as crazy as someone saying they don't want their significant other to go to a club because they could have an affair. This could happen on a trip to 7-11 and so can the problems you mentioned.
__________________
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." -- John Wooden
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 04:37pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Goose -- I attended one of the Dale Kelley camps this summer and one of the major points that the clinicians communicated to the campers was that Dale is looking for people with personality - not robots. Yes there are certains things mechanically that he wants to see, but he wants people that can manage a game. The best referees in the game today have acheived their level of success because of their personality, their ability to communicate, conflict resolution skills, ability to manage a game, etc. Each game is a different set of situations, challenges, and experiences. You have to adapt on a nightly basis. There is no cookie-cutter way to handle everything.
Here's an idea: keep a scouting report on supervisors, camp clinicians, etc. Write down what they feel is important or which mechanics they prefer. Reviewing these notes before each season, camp, or game will allow you look really good. Truthfully, you're goal at a camp should be to simply eliminate any reason for a clinician or supervisor to "scratch" you from their list. As a result, simply give them what they want and you'll do just fine.
__________________
Jeff Pearson
|
|
Tue Jul 19, 2005, 10:14pm
|
|||
|
|||
|
Goose,
Your saying the words mechanics and uniformity in the same sentence. They don't go together anymore, trust me I am one of the younger ones on this forum, and I mean this as far as signals mechanics go. Officiating, especially at the higher levels it is about selling your call, looking clean and crisp while doing so, communicating well enough that your partners know what the call was, and admist all that having your own style, because for those of us who want to MOVE UP it is about two things: GETTING THE PLAYS RIGHT(first and foremost) and looking athletic and clean while getting the plays right. See I am one of those SEC kids that tomegun was talking about. All my mentoring comes from guys in the SEC umbrella, and these are the most UNIFORMED guys I know.... as far as getting the calls correct. They don't care if they use a hold signal and it is different than the one in the CCA manual or the NFHS manual, the supervisors are happy as can be if you get the call right and you communicate well with your partners(they care about a whole lot more than that, but it is too much to name). The above is all the NBA guys stress. They want you to be in the right position so you can give yourself an even better chance at what they want the most: GETTING THE PLAY RIGHT. Don't get me wrong mechanics are great........ at the high school level, where 80% of the guys don't care about moving up, you need those because the guys who don't know hardly anything about the sport try to get into officiating and the supervisor takes them because he doesn't have enough officials already. You are on a forum where I am sure that at least 65% of the guys on here would love to get a call tommorrow to referee something higher than HS or the college level they are currently at. I wish it was just open to guys aspiring to moving up and wanting to understand the game better and why they missed calls instead of guys who say a guy with 7 years of experience is not good enough to coach a clinic. Zach Zarba is one of the best teachers I have had. He's not one of THE BEST IN THE WORLD because he has a lot of experience it is because he has had some of the greatest mentors and teachers this game has known. For the love of all things holy, his mentor was Ronnie Nunn. I would have to go out on a limb and dare to say he learned alot of what he needed to know in just a couple of years. Last but not least the point you tried to make about a 7 year guy not having seen as much as a 15-20-30 year guy, is a good point, but in the case of SEC they don't want thay 15-20-30 year guy they want that 1 to 4 year guy and stick him with some guys who have done it a little longer than that and by the time his 7th season rolls around, as far as knowing how to officiate a game with all the great guys that taught him that were in the upper echelon of basketball officiating, he beats the he** out of the 15-20-30 yr vet who thought he knew all he needed to know and had seen almost everything. I am sorry to rant at you like this, but I know we are coming from 2 totally different sides of the spectrum, because I am young and you are older. I just want you to understand that if a kid is caught early (like I was) and taught by some great people (like I am) and put in a great system (like me and many others are) they have a great chance to succeed in a short amount of time. They don't have to see every play, they just have to use the knowledge that these great educators of the games have given them and apply it to the best of their abilities to get the play right, and 9 times out of 10 they will get it right because it is a chain system where I am working with a guy who has done this for a couple of years and had that play a couple of years ago with a guy who had that a couple of years ago, so on and so forth. It is all about learning quickly and sitting down and having chats about plays. It is also about watching film. With the technology we have these days there is no reason a kid that wanted to work hard enough could see alot and if not all the weird plays a guy who has been reffing 20 yrs has seen in just a matter of 2 yrs or less. I watch film constantly and it has been the shining light for me. If you just eat, sleep, and breathe this stuff you can be that good, but you almost have to do so and I know people like Zach Zarba just to name one, that was bitten by the bug, and just fell utterly, and deeply in love with this profession and I reiterate the word profession. And to think all I was going to say on this post originally was: IT IS ALL ABOUT GETTING THE PLAYS RIGHT!!!! So much for that. [Edited by refTN on Jul 20th, 2005 at 03:15 AM]
|
|
Wed Jul 20, 2005, 02:37am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I await your enlightenment of me.
|
|
Wed Jul 20, 2005, 03:07am
|
|||
|
|||
|
Mr. RefTN,
While a absolutely salute your enthusiasm, I would caution you against the tempation to imagine that you are qualified to work higher levels of this game because you have attended a remarkable camp. Further, there is no substitute for being a student of the game, and if that means watching hundreds of hours of game film a year, or perhaps getting in the trenches and working some high school or rec ball, then please be assured you aren't wasting your time. Permit me to share a story from my own experience unrelated to basketball per se, yet the analogy is as appropriate to officiating as it was for me at the time. I paid for a great deal of my college by driving trucks. For the most part, this meant hauling fresh produce out of the fields to processing plants or canneries. I worked for a company that hired college students almost exlusively, while most of the other companies had seasoned, experienced drivers. Since we all worked out of the same central dispatching areas, we came into contact regularly. The guys in my company all had brand new trucks to drive with eight speed trasmissions (which is about as close to automatic as it was possible to have) Some of these trucks had fewer than 30 miles on them when we picked them up. A semi truck is consideren NEW until it has 100,000 miles on it and it takes time to break in -- a process which should happen slowely and gently. Instead, my fellow drivers and I all drove with our feet flat on the floor, driving as fast as we could possibly make the bohemiths go, with no consideration for the equipment or the risks we were taking ourselves. We often worked 60 to 100 without sleep. As you may have already assumed, we had a reputation among the more seasoned drivers as being a bunch of Yahoos! We were discribed as an accident just waiting to happen. Not suprisingly, we all just kind of laughed at all these old geesers; thinking them to be jealous of our new trucks and the fact that we got a bunch of the best runs. What we didn't know was that my company owner used to bribe the dispatcher in order to get us those great runs because it allowed us a chance to haul more frieght, which was how he got paid. It wasn't until I switched companies, and had one of those old geesers practically adopt me that I began to understand just how much of a YAHOO I truly was. I didn't even understand most of the fundamentals of being safe even though I had been driving for a couple of years. All of this is a long-winded way of saying, establish a rapport with a very senior, experienced official whom you respect, and become his (or her) apprentice. Allow this mentor to guide your officiating, and potentially, your career. Despite all the wonderful things you have been exposed to thus far, there really is no substitute for experience, and the judgement which often accompanies it. We may not all share your vision for rapid promotion, and for many, we may have discoverd other aspects of our lives which are equally important to us as officiating is: things that have helped us to create balance. We may not have been put on the fast track to instant succes, and yet, we don't lack a commitment to professionalism either. There is literally a plethora of experience available to you (and me) right here on this website, that were you and I to availe ourselves of this wealth of knowledge, we might discover it would help spring board us to levels of play we only imagine ourselves working right now. To paraphrase a concept from "Illusions" by Richard Bach, ... everything I've written here might be wrong. Keep working, growing, questioning, and forming your own ideas of how to best serve this game.
__________________
Nothing great is ever accomplished without great risk.
|
 |
| Bookmarks |
|
|
Linear Mode
