Just read the 5 page Post on "Statement Most Often Made by Officials". Some thoughts......

1. Does anyone ever wonder it Officating attracts a certain personality type? My oldest friend, who was just a great point-guard and is unbelieveable insightful about basketball strategy.....would never go near officating. He thinks I'm crazy. I tell him it is competitive which I like in the sense that your competing within yourself to do a good job. I tell him that it keeps me around the game which I loved. But honestly......do I like the "Power" a bit too? I know the answer in my case and it's not somethng I'm proud of.

2. Does it kill anyone else about how screwed up Youth Sports are? This isn't recent. I go back to the 60's from a HS Program that was ALL about winning. Unfortunately, for the kids that did play and didn't play...it wasn't enough about them learning life lessons.

I tell the kids I Coach that all the baloney that is pushed about Sports ='ing Life is nonsense. A sporting contest is about 1 event in time and a winner & a loser for one moment. It should be fun, kind of interesting - nothing more. I'm 55 and from what I see about life, it's about always being "ready to play, again". Too much guilt about losing is making kids not want to play and that's a bad thing.

Just about 100% the time a Team loses....it's because the other Team had better kids. It's that simple. I tell my kids to hold their heads high walking off the court.....I don't care if we won or lost. Frankly, I'd rather see them play good basketball and get beat than play selfish and win. It's about the journey and not the moment.

3. Sometimes you "real" Refs get caught up in the Rules more than what the Game is suppose to be about. Two years ago, my Team is up by 2 toward the end of the Game in a Y playoff. The other Coach called his second TO of the 1/2. In our League you get one. The Ref T'd him and I went over and told him that we don't call it that "formally" in our League. We aren't shooting the T and give them the ball back. My kids were astonished. So I told them, you want to win it on the Court not on a technicality. Right? (Thank God we did win that one.) That's a life lesson. If you take that T....why not cheat on a test, sue Market Basket for slipping on a grape, ot cheat on your spouse, etc. This stuff about T'ing up a kid for taking off a bloody shirt at the bench is bad. That's not what loving the game is about. The NFHS should make all that non-basketball stuff "recommendations" and not penalties that determine the outcome of competitions.

Oh, God......the nurses are coming to medicate me again.......

I hope those nurses give you enough meds to shut the "bad rule book" stuff up. Please, please, please allow us anal-retentive lawyer-wannabes to have our little power trips and head games. It's all we've got!! :D

Now, exactly how is the offiical supposed to know that "we don't call it that "formally" in our League?" He's given a set of league rules that he's expected to enforce. He doesn't call it and he's got to listen to some Pat Riley look-a-like tell him what the rule is. So don't blame the offiical who's enforcing a rule he's been told to enforce, simply because you as coaches ignore it.

Also, don't blame us for the rules that the NFHS writes. We just enforce the rulebook, we don't author it.

Sometimes you "real" coaches get caught up in making up your own as the game goes along.

Whooo!! Somebody needs a hug!

The GREATEST call NEVER made was when Richie Powers ignored Paul Silas's request for an illegal TO at the end of the first OT during the triple OT Celtics-Suns Playoff Game.
What courage he had.

I know the NBA is professional but if you are an athlete....do you want to win it on an admistrative T?

I tend to lose my patience with Coaches that start on you from the Jump Ball. The absolute WORST Ref in the world is equally bad both ways. Statistically, it's not going to affect the outcome or give a Team advanatge/disadvanatge.

My feeling is that these Coaches are probably frauds and don't know the game well enough to be watching their players and trying to see where adjustments need to be made.
If you really are Coaching, 75% of it is watching what your Team does defensively. (My opinion).

I do tend to get PO'd at Refs that don't protect Airborne Shooters and allow the HS age kids to get creamed like Allen Iverson in the NBA. I see that a bit too often.

I meant no criticism of the Ref in my Post. He was doing his job and that is the Rule. It's just after playing a great back and forth game.....whether you win or lose.....do you want to remember it as being decided on a T for calling an extra TO? (I know Chris Weber and James Worthy will back me up 100%.)

I'm sure the bonehead who called the extra TO would rather the T not be called. :)

But I'm not sure why James Worthy has to do with any of this.

JCrow...you lost me when you said, if you take that T why not cheat on a test? Why not cheat on your spouse? Playing by the rules (whether it's a T you agree with or not) IS NOT EQUAL TO CHEATING OR BEING DISHONEST.

Maybe you could teach your players/kids to respect the rules and those who try to enforce them fairly, regardless of if you think it's too strict or unnecessary. If it's a rule you want to change, handle it in your coaches pre-season meeting.

What is being taught when coaches change rules as they go? Is the other coach teaching his kids, "Yeah, I know we have rules about timeouts, but we don't need to follow them." I think I understand your intent, but I totally disagree with how you stated it to your players.

Hmmm, I'm struggling with this one JCrow. I agree the game should be fun. It shouldn't be all about winning and losing. But the game isn't about the coach either.

Basic facts of game-day life:

• Once the officials take the floor, it's their game
• That means it's no longer your game
• Yes, it's still about the kids
• But it's not about you
• Because it's a competitive event, a neutral 3rd party is required to ensure the contest is fair
• The rules are there for the same reason
• They ensure that, to the extent possible, the game is played fairly
• AND that the administrative crap that none of us like to deal with and EVERYBODY has differing opinions on, is at least handled consistently

You talk about life lessons, and then you DEMONSTRATE open disrespect for authority? You just taught those kids that it's better to play by your own rules. You just taught those kids that any rule you don't agree with can be cast aside for no better reason than because you don't agree with it. And you've just taught those (mis)lessons to a group of impressionable kids who will remember your lesson for a long, long time. A group of kids, by the way, who don't yet have the maturity and philosophical framework to understand the subtle difference between "not insisting the other guy be penalized for his mistake" and "refusing to obey the laws of a civilized society."

Nu1 - You make a good point - I'm probably nuts.

My anology: I was thinking about our former President that didn't consider it adultry because of what the "formal" definition of sex is.

What I see in Society in this theme that Winning is OK....as long as you Win. How you do it doesn't matter much?
That's what I'm trying to get at.

I think most people equate Winning with Finacial Success.

Our media celebrates characters like Snoop, Britney Spears, Donald Trump, Barry Sheck, TO.....as long as you have big $$$$ you're a success. I think this message just poisons kids.

I grew up in Massachusetts. All his old players love Red Auerbach. The guy is a God around here. I give him credit for not being a racist when many NBA Teams had a quota. And, I understand he was fair and a good manager of people. But personally, I always felt that the guy was terrible. He had to be the worst sportsman on earth. What kind of a jerk lights a cigar just before winning? He wasn't blocking those shots.....it was Russell. Plus, his Ref baiting was just awful. You take classy competitors like Oscar Robinson, Jerry West, Hal Greer and Wilt....did they deserve that?

Then a truly classy man like KC Jones loses his Coaching Job because he's viewed as not being assertive enough?

Our Society venerates behavior like that and then we whine about Youth Coaches that think they SHOULD behave like Red.

To me, the purest games that I ever played were in the Parks. We brought our best 5 and met their best 5. Nobody taunted because if you did.....you'd be picking up your teeth. You called your own fouls. No parents. No Coaches. A few fans. When the game was done...it was so much fun, you played again. You liked the playing more than caring about who won a particular game.

That experience is just about dead in this country. Kids don't play unless their parents drive them to a gym to be Coached by a guy that thinks Red Auerbach was a role model.

You talk about life lessons, and then you DEMONSTRATE open disrespect for authority? You just taught those kids that it's better to play by your own rules. You just taught those kids that any rule you don't agree with can be cast aside for no better reason than because you don't agree with it. And you've just taught those (mis)lessons to a group of impressionable kids who will remember your lesson for a long, long time. A group of kids, by the way, who don't yet have the maturity and philosophical framework to understand the subtle difference between "not insisting the other guy be penalized for his mistake" and "refusing to obey the laws of a civilized society."

Point taken....who know's maybe it was wrong on my part? This was in an equal playing time, Rec League for 9-12 Graders. The Lesson I would have hoped to get across was that of having some respect for your opponent and the Game. You can't have a Game....without an opponent. And I just couldn't see (in that situation) ending a truly great game against a great opponent in that chessey a manner. I did it in a very cooperative manner with the other Coach and at no time dis-respected the Ref. When I Coach, I almost never say anything to a Ref except "Thanks" after the end of the game.

Back to Chris Weber and that infamous time out in the championship game.......Do most of you remember the referee NOT calling a travel on Chris Weber as he turned to dribble up the court on that famous last play?????

As JimCrow is saying..........that was a GREAT no call.......it would have been awful (even more awful than him calling a TO the team did not have) if the game would have been decided on a travel in the back court with noone even guarding him...........

Someone once said, and I have found it to be true, "No fans will remember anything that was called out here tonight EXCEPT what was called in the last 2 minutes of the game. Make sure you get the call right in the last 2 minutes and make sure you don't call anything stupid in the last 2 minutes."

I say this to myself toward the end of each close game I officiate.

JCrow,

Thanks for the response. I do appreciate and agree with what I thought was the intent of your original post. It was that one analogy I had a problem with.

As a parent, former youth coach, and now ref. I hope I'm instilling positive things (such as you mentioned) in my children and those I have contact with.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

I'm not sure why James Worthy has to do with any of this.

Somebody on the other team threw the ball to Worthy in the last minute of a late round tournament game when he was at North Carolina. The ref's should have invoked the bad peripheral vision/he didn't mean to do that rule.

By refusing to take the T shots, you are hurting the game of basketball. You are teaching these kids at a young age that a coach can override a refs decision, not good.
Question for other refs, as a ref is their anything I can do if a coach refuses to take a tech shot. What about giving him a T????

I have to disagree with you, John. First, he was being guarded. Second, the official turned his head and missed the travel. He didn't no call it. Wanna see the tape? :)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by just another ref

Quote:

Originally posted by BktBallRef Quote: I'm not sure why James Worthy has to do with any of this. Somebody on the other team threw the ball to Worthy in the last minute of a late round tournament game when he was at North Carolina. The ref's should have invoked the bad peripheral vision/he didn't mean to do that rule.

Yes, that did happen, IN 1982! :)

Fred Brown threw the ball away with less than 10 seconds to play in the Georgetown championship game. It had nothing to do with the Chris Webber play IN 1993. ;)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

Originally posted by just another ref Quote: Originally posted by BktBallRef Quote: I'm not sure why James Worthy has to do with any of this. Somebody on the other team threw the ball to Worthy in the last minute of a late round tournament game when he was at North Carolina. The ref's should have invoked the bad peripheral vision/he didn't mean to do that rule. Yes, that did happen, IN 1982! :) Fred Brown threw the ball away with less than 10 seconds to play in the Georgetown championship game. It had nothing to do with the Chris Webber play IN 1993. ;)

Are you backing me up or scolding me? I agree the Worthy play and the Webber play are not related. Just couldn't think of another notable Worthy play.

I wouldn't have let you get away with not shooting the technical throws. You would've gotten T'd up for not giving me a shooter, though. Of course, I haven't worked rec ball in years, so I'm thinking about the HS varsity level here.

We constantly remind coaches how many timeouts are left, ESPECIALLY when a coach is out of timeouts. The coach is supposed to communicate with his players. If someone calls for a timeout, and is entitled to, we call it. Who knows, maybe the team wanted to buy a timeout with a T? Likely not, but it's not my job to be a mindreader.

That said, I like the football rule better -- you call one and you don't have one, we simply don't grant it. If we do, accidentally, we start the clock immediately upon recoginizing that the team didn't have one. At some levels, it's a delay of game penalty.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by just another ref

Quote:

Originally posted by BktBallRef Quote: Originally posted by just another ref Quote: Originally posted by BktBallRef Quote: I'm not sure why James Worthy has to do with any of this. Somebody on the other team threw the ball to Worthy in the last minute of a late round tournament game when he was at North Carolina. The ref's should have invoked the bad peripheral vision/he didn't mean to do that rule. Yes, that did happen, IN 1982! :) Fred Brown threw the ball away with less than 10 seconds to play in the Georgetown championship game. It had nothing to do with the Chris Webber play IN 1993. ;) Are you backing me up or scolding me? I agree the Worthy play and the Webber play are not related. Just couldn't think of another notable Worthy play.

No, you're cool. Just pointing out for JCrow that Chris Webber's TO had nothing to do with James Worthy.

Getting away from the TO plays...

I just think some people, in all aspects of the game, often tend to forget what it's all about. When you're playing the game, as much as you want to win, it's because it's a fun game (the very best!) to play. It's no longer fun when people's opinions of their role supersedes the purpose of the game - to have fun in the first place.

It's not all "the officials' game." It's not all the coaches' game either... basketball is played by the players. Of course, both the officials and the coaches are essential parts of the game, but a game of basketball consisting of two coaches standing in the box arguing about calls made by officials on players who aren't there wouldn't be much fun.

I am not an official, nor am I a coach; but, knowing a bit about basketball, I have a great deal of respect for both roles. I know coaches can get very frustrated, and I know officials take a lot of crap from fans, players, and coaches.

For the game of basketball to be fun, it has to be fair. That's the officials' job, and for the most part they do a good job. But it's no longer a good job when one thinks "Well, I made the right call according to the rulebook, directions, and interpretations. Too bad if it ruins the game."

Everyone in the world of basketball looks to constantly improve; and that is fine - in fact, it's essential. But your improvement, as an official, a coach, or a player, is all supposed to be conducive to a better game of basketball that's more fun for everybody. To call it "your game" exclusively is selfish and counterproductive to what I believe is the primary purpose of basketball specifically and sports in general.

So you'd rather that an official made a call that was against the rules because it fits his or her definition of "fair?"

You might be playing a game with a basket and a ball, but you aren't playing basketball.

If you have specific rules that yuou think should be changed, I'm sure the rules committee(s) would be glad to hear from you.

You compare taking the T (which is in the rules) to cheating on a test?? You are going to fault the official for applying the rules?? Huh?

If you don't want the T, then change the rules.

I think you would rather have a game on the driveway with no refs. If so, then go for it.

I say it ALL game long. I am not going to call it differently in the 4th quarter than the rest of the game. The kids deserve consistency so they can adjust.

I've been thinking about the comments:

1. I can find no record of James Worthy ever calling an illegal TO. I don't know where I got that one! My apologies to Mr. Worthy.

2. I may have been "show-boating" when I refused that T. It was a funny situation. The father Coaching the other Team probably didn't know the League Rules. It seemed like the sporting thing to do at the time. Would I do it again? In a Rec League maybe....in Varsity Competition, I understand the need to be more formal.

There have been many Posts concerning the difference between the "Spirt of the Rules" and the "Letter of the Rules". There are ones on "odd shirts", "dunking in warm-ups", etc. I tend to side more with the people who look at upholding the Spirit of Rules. Here's an example:

Years ago, I read book by Alan Dershowitz. He had a case where two Drug Dealers got into an altercation with a Supplier. Drug Dealer A shot the man in the chest twice with a .45. He then turned to Drug Dealer B and told him to shoot the man so that Drug Dealer B could never rat him out. Drug Dealer B complied and shot the Supplier twice with a 9mm. They were both arrested and charged with First Degree Murder. Dershowitz defended Drug Dealer B and got him an aquital. How? Dershowitz argued foresenically that the Supplier was already dead from Drug Dealer A's two fatal gunshots and as he was DEAD.....Drug Dealer B could NOT have murdered him.

To me, that seemed a terrible miscarriage of justice as I saw Drug Dealer A and B as equally guilty of First Degree Murder. But...it was definitely supported by the the Letter of the Law defining First Degree Murder.

Dershowitz has a brillent intellect. His books are filled with stories about bad people avoiding punishment because he can find a way to show that their deed didn't fall within the specific Letter of the Law. But....after reading them, you wonder how the guy sleeps at night? (He does love basketball so he can't be all bad.)

I tend to think that adhering to the Spirit of a Rule often serves to effect better Justice.

Can you tell us how you are relating that to a game of basketball?

Just a couple of thoughts about some recent comments:

Once they take the court, it is the official's game. That's not selfish, that's the way it has to be. A comptetitive contest, especially one as subjective as basketball, is only fun when both sides can depend on impartial judgements. The moment it appears that the decisions are being based on something other than the agreed upon rules, it begins to be less fun.

The problem with enforcing the spirit of the rules over the letter is that too often "the spirit of the rule" is in the eye of the beholder. Sure, there are some areas where we get widespread agreement. And there are cases where the team that would benefit agrees to set aside the letter. But for the most part, talk of the spirit of the rules is just a tactic to get one's way at the expense of the game.

...and, as a Coach, you sold that to the parents and school administrators? If so, I bet you could sell sand to a Nomad. :D
Of course, what makes "better kids"? Coaching, preparing, practicing, strategy, match-ups, and athleticism to name just a few.

"My feeling is that these Coaches are probably frauds and don't know the game well enough to be watching their players and trying to see where adjustments need to be made."

Well, according to your first quote, it doesn't matter what the coach is watching...as long as "Coach Fraud" has the better kids...his team will win "just about 100% of the time."

How does that make it the officials' game? It just makes it a properly officiated players' game... if that's what "the officials' game" means, then I agree.

One point that has not been brought up is that basketball is a game of making split second decisions and quick physical and mental reactions. Its part of the game whether it is deciding who to pass to during a 3 on 1 fast break, or whether to call a timeout after your team secures a rebound during the last minute of a game. If you are not aware of the situation at hand (how many timeouts your team has) and call one, that warrants a penalty.

It makes it a properly officiated game. To the players, it's their game. To the coaches, it's probably their game. To me, it's my game.

Exactly. I go into a game with the attitude that "It's my game and I'm not going to let anybody screw it up." I don't think you can do your job properly if you concede the game to anybody else.

Of course the game is for the kids, and they're the focus, not the officials. But we can't let one kid screw it up for the others. We can't let a coach screw it up for everybody. Notice the "we" in all of that. That's our responsibility, 'cuz it's our game.

There's no way I could disagree with that. It just seemed to me that the standalone affirmation "it's the officials' game" seemed a little selfish, with the speaker's priorities at the wrong place. An explanation like the ones BITS and Rich provided though, makes it much clearer.