You wouldn't by any chance be cutting the grass on all fours and using your teeth? You sound a lot like a Donkey. Or should I say Jack A$S?

This probably wont help, but I'll try anyway.

When we officiate, we worry about a thing called "advantage/disadvantage." That means, essentially, "leave things alone that are irrelevant and deal with the stuff that matters."

Here is the very first part of the rule book, called "The Intent and Purpose of the Rules."

"The restrictions which the rules place upon the players are intended to create a balance of play....Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule."

Thus, the rules themselves say we are supposed to pay attention to the intent and purpose of rules and to keep in mind balance of play.

Skill level is a big part of that.

If you are reffing a girls freshman game (and some boys freshman games, frankly), you could prevent the ball from ever penetrating the key most of the time. But that is not the purpose of the rules.

For instance, if little Suzie in a freshman girls game lifts her pivot foot before a pass from the wing when she isnt being guarded, there is no way I call that. You have to keep in mind the skill level. These girls at that level arent that good. Now, if she was guarded and the defender forced that walk (yes, we do use that term colloquially, though it is called travel) then she is getting that whistle.

You can come up with a million examples of non-calls because of lack of skill by the players or other things that have no impact on advantage/disadvantage.

The key is "advantage/disadvantage" and intelligent application of the rules and the purpose of the rules to a particular playing situation.

THAT is why not every infraction you might see is called. AND the rule book TELLS US to do it that way.

I actually had a discussion about this before a girls freshman game last year. I was there early (we were short a ref and I was out on the floor helping coordinate some things before the first game, normally I wouldnt have been out on the floor) and a parent asked me a question about why things arent always called. I explained as I did above about advantage and disadvantage (I took the little Suzie example above from that coverstation actually). They said that was really helpful. Now that they knew why some things werent called, it really made a difference to them. I didnt get a hoot or holler from that section about a call all game.

But keep in mind that the key thing is player safety, too. If I see a hard foul, that is getting whistled. But even contact can vary. With the lower levels you can have minimum contact due to lack of skill. Sometimes you let that go. Similarly, with older boys (say JV), you can have a little bumping in the post and that is just part of the game at that skill level. If it were freshman girls, that gets a whistle. JV boys, maybe not. JV boys are just going to be a bit more physical. It is a physical game. And they are stronger. They can handle it. The younger girls, not the same.

Anyway, I hope that helps.

Heaven help us. It's GL!! :(

Please don't say that. :eek:

Re: can a referee make all the calls
 

I've really never seen a MLB "referee" tweet his whistle for a walk but I suppose he could. I would suggest he leave that call to the announcers, but I'm just an internet referee so what do I know.

So a rocket scientist, a psychic, and a referee walk into a bar.....

Well said!

"Be bery bery quiet." ( That's my best Elmer Fudd)

Hopefully, he won't find this site.

Why would you call anything in that situation anyway? Lifting the pivot foot isn't a violation prior to a pass.

I think Elmer would say "Be vewy vewy quiet". You're thinking of the Garret Morris sketch where he says, "Baseball been bery bery good to me". :)

Right now I'm thinking of Sister Mary Elephant, who said...

<font size = 20>"SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"</font>

Thank you.

With this, though, you also have to determine who initiated the contact, if the contact affected the final result of the play, and what was the final result of the play.

In freshman girls or varsity boys, or JUCO or NCAA, this principle must always be applied. If I have A1 driving to the basket, and B1 is bumping or hand checking, if A1 is still proceeding to the basket in a somewhat straight line, I might not call that a foul if A1 scores the layup. If the contact from B1 is strong enough, I give the 'And 1'. I'm not going to penalize A1 and stop a layup by bailing out B1 with a cheap hand check at the free-throw line.

Ultimately, both teams just want to score. I try not to take away scoring opportunities in search of the 'cheap' foul.

Would the tower philosophy pertain to this? It has been awhile since I have seen it and even longer since I have read it but it seems like alot of the same principles.