So, do you push a couple of the players out of the way so you can get up court and help your partner? And, then only if you hear a crowd reaction, do you look back to see if something's happening with the players you left behind?

It's not a copout, it's the trail's job to stay back and watch the other 7. This is, unfortunately, one of the disadvantages to 2-person mechanics. In 3-person, the C can certainly help with this situation, but in this case you don't have the "luxury" of that third set of eyes. It's the L's call.

Again, go back and read the original post - if you come that far, who do you call the foul on?

It is not the trail's job to stay back and watch the other 7 players.

I don't buy for a second that A1, B1 and B2 were the only players in the frontcourt and the other 7 were hanging out at the free throw line in the backcourt.

With this logic, where does trail draw the line of staying?

4 in the FC?

6?

8?

Or do they hang back until all 10 get there?

The official's manual says trail should be behind THE BALL not all the players. It's called transition for a reason.

Sorry partner, I have 3 players back at the free throw line, you have the other 7.:rolleyes:

Who's job is it?

First and I repeat, I don't buy that 7 players remained back.

Second in 2 person there is going to always be a trade off to see the play. So don't tell me that if the majority of players are moving to the other end, trail should hang back.

Like I said, where does trail draw the line?

8 players? 7? 6? 5? 4? 3? 2? 1? None in the BC?

Here's my thought.

70 ft away you could not possibly know what happened. If you partner missed afoul so what. How many did you miss that game?

Lastly what is you primary? It certainly wast the ball. Most coaches I know would chew you up for making the ATT call even if it was right.

You stay back only if there's a reason to stay back, such as a competitive matchup, or if there are volatile players in the backcourt, players on the ground, etc. In other words, if there is a legitimate reason to stay back. That doesn't mean you ignore everyone else, but your primary responsibility is to help the new lead with a potentially difficult call.

Similarly, if you have a whistle on the play in the backcourt while everyone's looking at the ball in the frontcourt, someone better be getting ejected or in some sort of trauma. If there's very little potential for this situation to happen, you need to be where the play is to referee the secondary defender. People just don't hit people out of the blue, and if you're refereeing the play and miss an attack in the backcourt like that, chances are that you missed a lot more earlier in the game that led to this.

Ok, we're arguing two different points - you're saying BIG O isn't telling the truth, that there really wasn't 7 players back, and he's just a slow, lazy ref who's making excuses for not having two sets of eyes on the ball. I'm talking about the play as posted, because I didn't have the luxury of being there. I have no basis to make the assumptions you have regarding the reliability of BIG O.

So, let's go back to the play as posted by BIG O, which, by the way, was a series of two different transitions as I read it. You seem to be advocating two different points that seem to go against the basics as I've been taught. In 2-person officiating, I have always been taught the officials keep the players between them - boxing in. Yes, that means hanging back while there are players in the backcourt. You seem to advocate leaving players behind you to get to the ball. Second, I've been taught the basics of trusting your partner and calling in your area. In this play you seem to be advocating having two sets of eyes on the ball and the three players, while leaving the other seven players behind. If this is a new mechanic, where do I find it?

It's just wrong to justify having two officials watch three players and the ball, while no one is watching the other seven. And you still have not answered my question - who are you going to call the foul on, B1 or B2? And why? Also, please tell me, in your mind, how many players can you safely leave behind to go be closer to a play? 2? 3? 7? 8?

2-person is hard in this day of faster, better players. But, there are still basics that need to be followed. The original question was essentially, should I go help a partner on a call even though I'm not 100% sure? The answer is still no, because of the basics of trusting your partner to make the call or no-call, unless even the grandmother in the top row realizes the call was wrong. In this case, it was not 100% clear.

I've been taught to bust your butt.

Go back to that first post and no mention was made about a "double" transition. That came up in the revised version.

It also came out after the first post that A1 got the ball below the arch on Big O's side of the floor, so...if it was transition with Big O as lead and the ball turned over below the 3 point line, wouldn't it be likely that some players are above the 3 point line or in the backcourt when it happened? So we are to believe that these players kept running AWAY from the play and then just stopped.

The entire thing smells fishy, to me.

You keep dodging my question, so I'll try one more time.

Boxing in all the players is great and all, but impossible all the time in 2 person, you have to trade off something to call the game.

The official's manual says trail should be behind the ball during play. Note it does not say between all the players and your partner.

I see you think staying with 7...even though I don't believe 7 stayed back for a second in this play...is proper, now comes the question, what ratio do you leave?

3/7 you will stay, what about 4/6 or 5/5?

Do you wait for the majority, 6/4?

Still back on 7/3? All 3 could be the same team, do you pause to check?

8/2?

9/1? That player could be flipping you off or taunting the other team's bench, after all, so do you risk leaving him/her versus "trusting" your partner with the other 9 players?;)

You keep dodging my questions; I've answered yours. In 2-person mechanics, it is the L's job in a fast-break transition to be on-ball, and the T's job to stay back with the other players and referee off-ball. So, answer my questions: who do you call the foul on? How many players do you leave behind? When do you advocate having both officials watch on-ball? Once again, I'm not arguing the truth of the original play, I'm giving advice on how the play was presented. So, when do you advocate over-ruling a partner's call or no-call?

Busting your butt is good. Busting your butt past players so you can make a borderline call in front of your partner is bad officiating.

Go back and read what I wrote several posts ago.

Had trail gotten to half court instead of staying at the free throw line in the BC, they'd be position to see the play better and be close enough to go get something if needed.

That is what I've been saying all along.

I'll continue to bust my butt and get in the FC with the players all moving that way...which is the case 99% of the time.

You hang back and appear lazy if you like, God forbid while you are back there babysitting a couple of stragglers, nothing gets missed where the game is going on.:rolleyes:

What exactly are you refereeing when staying back? Are you watching for an illegal screen 60 feet behind the play? Of course not because there's nothing to call in that situation, as I said earlier, if you're calling something off ball that has completely nothing to do with the play which is half a court ahead, there'd better be blood. What you can do is help your partner out in transition on the secondary defender on the weak side that he might not see. By helping out you allow him to avoid having to possibly guess or miss a foul in transition, a potentially emotional foul, which missing could easily lead to the crew losing control of the game (just see what happened in the original scenario).

Is there a chance that someone in the backcourt will deck someone? Of course, but it's minute and almost certainly something would have led up to that action. If you didn't see the buildup, the problem occured well before. As has been said, there are trade-offs in 2 whistle, and the odds greatly favor me hustling up and helping my partner, unless there's a clearly defined reason for me to stay that I can tell my supervisor.

Little things can ruin games, say partner misses the foul call that I could've helped on and the supervisor reviews the tape and asks me, "Why were you 70 feet away when you could've helped on that," it might be different where I am than you, but the response, "I was watching the other players" doesn't cut it if you don't have an explanation of why, along the lines of, "34 white and 55 blue had been jawing at each other and I wanted to referee that matchup to make sure nothing happened." Just watching the players with no explanation isn't enough, it looks bad and it leaves your crew hanging out to dry.

I will make a suggestion and you have to balance the two but Dont leave stragglers behind you. Even if there are just two that are being slow, get in a position to see them and the rest of the floor.

On a press I never let players get behind me and on fast breaks I keep all the players in front of me. You have to if you dont the time you dont there will be a fight or something else stupid and you'll have no clue what happened.

I always find it interesting that some people are always in favor of going against what is mechanically sound to watch the ball. You can always find a reason to watch the ball. How about finding a reason to stay back with 7 players who aren't going to announce, "Mr. Official, we are on the brink of fighting, pleas stay back and watch us."

I do work somewhere that does have two-man varsity games. You do what you can to survive. We must be mechanically sound to catch as many fouls as we can. That does not include passing judgement on plays 70ft away that we "think" might have been fouls.

We should commit errors of ommission instead of errors of commission. In other words, if you aren't sure (which big O doesn't seem to be) don't blow the whistle! It seems like big O is using the photographer and everyone in the crowd to help decide if this play, which wasn't in his area to begin with, was a foul or not. That should tell us what should have been done...nothing.

This is the best post I have read in a long long long time. Absolutely, 100% correct. (Except for the spelling of "pleas". :) )

Puh-leeze... :rolleyes:

btw...there's a word for officials who 'bust @ss' downcourt as new T on steals leaving opponents behind them: rookies.