How far will you go to save a game?

[Camron Rust]

I think that the lead should make the call. Sounds like this was in transition to me (full court press). Until the ball settles in the front court, the lead's primary will extend a little further. Even if you don't agree with that, it is the right call and the lead doesn't even need to be "looking" there to see it. A lead could be reffing a competitive matchup right in front of him that also places his line of sight right at the trap. If the lead see an obvious foul and realizes that the C was not in a position to see it, I think the lead is obligated to call it. If not the lead, perhaps the popcorn guy?

[zebraman]

I don't know guys.... seems to me that if we think it's OK for the lead to make this call, we're starting to get into that "ok for anyone to call anywhere on the court" type attitude that is exactly what 3-person is not about.

If I trust my partners in the first quarter, I trust them in the fourth quarter. If the C didn't see it in his primary area and the T didn't see it in his secondary coverage area, then the lead didn't get a good look from the freakin' baseline.

Z

[Edited by zebraman on Jan 5th, 2006 at 06:20 PM]

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by zebraman
I don't know guys.... seems to me that if we think it's OK for the lead to make this call, we're starting to get into that "ok for anyone to call anywhere on the court" type attitude that is exactly what 3-person is not about.

If I trust my partners in the first quarter, I trust them in the fourth quarter. If the C didn't see it in his primary area and the T didn't see it in his secondary coverage area, then the lead didn't get a good look from the freakin' baseline.

Z

[Edited by zebraman on Jan 5th, 2006 at 06:20 PM]

If the L knows what he's doing he is not at the baseline in this play.

[tomegun]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
I think that the lead should make the call. Sounds like this was in transition to me (full court press). Until the ball settles in the front court, the lead's primary will extend a little further. Even if you don't agree with that, it is the right call and the lead doesn't even need to be "looking" there to see it. A lead could be reffing a competitive matchup right in front of him that also places his line of sight right at the trap. If the lead see an obvious foul and realizes that the C was not in a position to see it, I think the lead is obligated to call it. If not the lead, perhaps the popcorn guy?

Thank God for geography!

[tomegun]

Originally posted by zebraman
I don't know guys.... seems to me that if we think it's OK for the lead to make this call, we're starting to get into that "ok for anyone to call anywhere on the court" type attitude that is exactly what 3-person is not about.

If I trust my partners in the first quarter, I trust them in the fourth quarter. If the C didn't see it in his primary area and the T didn't see it in his secondary coverage area, then the lead didn't get a good look from the freakin' baseline.

Z

[Edited by zebraman on Jan 5th, 2006 at 06:20 PM]

Z, I'm with you on this one. This is what comes to mind:

1. Some officials will always find a reason to look all over the court.
2. Constantly talking about getting the play right, no matter who calls it, is a clear indication that officials are ball-watching. This statement is one that enables this practice instead of talking about the proper mechanics. Which one will help the next time?
3. I'm really beginning to wonder about some - not all - officials actual experience with 3-person mechanics. There are proper mechanics! Where is the lengthy discussion about that?

I know this doesn't jive with a lot of people's opinions, but this is basketball season. For crying out loud, are we (I know I'm not) going to go out on the court and just have a free-for-all?

[zebraman]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

If the L knows what he's doing he is not at the baseline in this play.

Well we are discussing a post that says that the lead was under the basket when he made the call.

The post does not say where all ten players were. If the ball is being brought up court quickly by a guard, I find it hard to believe that there weren't some match-ups that the L was responsible for. Are we to believe that the other 8 players were trailing the ball? I'd say most of them were ahead of the ball, some of them in the L's area of responsibility.

As lead, we see where the T and C are with our peripheral vision or take "peeks." We don't take "looks." I hate buzzwords, but there is a difference between a peek and a look. Why is the L "looking" there?

Z

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by tomegun

Z, I'm with you on this one. This is what comes to mind:

1. Some officials will always find a reason to look all over the court.
2. Constantly talking about getting the play right, no matter who calls it, is a clear indication that officials are ball-watching. This statement is one that enables this practice instead of talking about the proper mechanics. Which one will help the next time?
3. I'm really beginning to wonder about some - not all - officials actual experience with 3-person mechanics. There are proper mechanics! Where is the lengthy discussion about that?

No matter which direction I'm looking, my vision doesn't stop at some artificial boundary. I may not focus outside of it but I'm not automatically blind beyond that line. If I'm covering guys in the paint and see an obvious mugging beyond my area (and partner was not in position to see it), I'm not doing my job if I don't go get it. Pay attention to the big time refs...while they don't ofter go out of their area, they will do it when there is something big to be called. They pay us to work the game, not play keep out of my sandbox. My goal is not to execute perfect mechanics at the expense of missing a big play but to, first, work the game. This sometimes requires stepping of of the box.

[Edited by Camron Rust on Jan 5th, 2006 at 09:00 PM]

[tomegun]

Camron, pay attention to the big time refs and you will see that many of them don't follow mechanics. Pay attention to many "big time" college refs and you will see they miss a lot of plays because they are looking all over the place. Go to a camp where a big time ref is the evaluator and see how far you get looking all over the place. Don't do as they do, do as they say-until you get where they are.

I do know exactly what you are saying and tomorrow I will pre-game that we will only stray this far out of our areas on non-basketball plays. I will say these words in your honor.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by tomegun

Z, I'm with you on this one. This is what comes to mind:

1. Some officials will always find a reason to look all over the court.
2. Constantly talking about getting the play right, no matter who calls it, is a clear indication that officials are ball-watching. This statement is one that enables this practice instead of talking about the proper mechanics. Which one will help the next time?
3. I'm really beginning to wonder about some - not all - officials actual experience with 3-person mechanics. There are proper mechanics! Where is the lengthy discussion about that?

I know this doesn't jive with a lot of people's opinions, but this is basketball season. For crying out loud, are we (I know I'm not) going to go out on the court and just have a free-for-all?

You're usually not this dense Tom.

We're not talking about calling all over the place.

We're talking about an unusual end of game play. Maybe you feel good about telling your partner in the locker room you saw him f@ck this game changing sitch with 5 seconds to go but decided to look the other way.

Not me.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by tomegun
Camron, pay attention to the big time refs and you will see that many of them don't follow mechanics. Pay attention to many "big time" college refs and you will see they miss a lot of plays because they are looking all over the place. Go to a camp where a big time ref is the evaluator and see how far you get looking all over the place. Don't do as they do, do as they say-until you get where they are.

I do know exactly what you are saying and tomorrow I will pre-game that we will only stray this far out of our areas on non-basketball plays. I will say these words in your honor.

We're not talking about looking all over the place the whole game. We're talking about a last second play where NOTHING was in the lead's area. Should he just close his eyes since there is nothing for him?

[tomegun]

First of all, the OP has conveniently not been around to say where the other 7 players were so we don't know what the L should have been looking at. And, I'm not too dense to ignore many past comments about taking a "peek" at three-pointers, fouls and other things. All this adds up to "let's just get it right" meaning if you think it is right forget about primaries. If an official is constantly doing this - hello - he/she is watching the ball.

Maybe the OP was the L in this situation.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by tomegun
First of all, the OP has conveniently not been around to say where the other 7 players were so we don't know what the L should have been looking at. And, I'm not too dense to ignore many past comments about taking a "peek" at three-pointers, fouls and other things. All this adds up to "let's just get it right" meaning if you think it is right forget about primaries. If an official is constantly doing this - hello - he/she is watching the ball.

Maybe the OP was the L in this situation.

Well Tom, it's pretty obvious that you have a low opinion of some of the people who posted in this thread.

Are you saying I'm a ballwatcher? That I call all over the gym? If not me, then who in this thread is a ballwatcher? Which of us do not measure up to the tomegun standards?

[tomegun]

Dan, I don't even know anyone that has posted in this thread except Chuck and Brianp. Far too much trust is put into a persons ability to type, read (the rules) and comprehend the meaning of the rules. That does not make someone good in practice. Don't let this whole internet official thing get your drawers in a bind; this isn't about what someone does, rather about a veteran official's philosophy. For my money philosophy is one thing that can be worked away from the court as well as on the court. Who practices something and doesn't try to get it right? IMO, you are doing that by constantly giving reasons for looking all over the court. Things happen, but we should (IMO) try to be mechanically perfect, and the results will be better than if we accept sub-standard practices.

Would you go telling your kids all the wrong things that you did and continue to do? I wouldn't because they will eventually want to try it out a little since "dad" does it.

This is what I'm saying, all this talk about getting it right is giving people a license to ball watch. What is easier to watch the ball or be desciplined enough to watch your primary? I think it is harder to watch the primary but there is someone, somewhere that might look up to you and emulate the things you do and say. They will eventually watch the ball too or should I say they will take a peek? Don't get offended if you think your way is mechanically sound. IMO, it isn't. It doesn't matter if we disagree because the man upstairs has blessed us with geography; you work wherever you are and I work where I am. If our paths cross at a higher level, you can bet your last dollar that I will get there with a mechanically sound philosophy. I am NOT saying that there are never times when you should do something "outside the box." However, far too much time is spent on the reasons why something wrong (mechanically) is done and not enough time on what could have been done to prevent it. For me, that is progress and lessons learned.

[brianp134]

Originally posted by tomegun

Z, I'm with you on this one. This is what comes to mind:

1. Some officials will always find a reason to look all over the court.
2. Constantly talking about getting the play right, no matter who calls it, is a clear indication that officials are ball-watching. This statement is one that enables this practice instead of talking about the proper mechanics. Which one will help the next time?
3. I'm really beginning to wonder about some - not all - officials actual experience with 3-person mechanics. There are proper mechanics! Where is the lengthy discussion about that?

I know this doesn't jive with a lot of people's opinions, but this is basketball season. For crying out loud, are we (I know I'm not) going to go out on the court and just have a free-for-all?

I agree with both Tom & Z. I guess this makes us the three amigos.

If you have six eyes on the ball, what is happening with the other players? Whose to say that another foul wasn't missed off the ball? I guess we could play devils advocate on this all day long.

[M&M Guy]

Tommy (may I call you Tommy? ), I think for the most part, we agree. I have worked with officials that call everything, anywhere on the court. And more often than not, they're wrong. That's why the system is in place, that's why there are well-defined areas of coverage - we are more apt to get it right when we stay within the system.

However, (you knew that was coming), in this particular play, there were 10 sec. left in the game, it was a 2 point game, this was a fast-break transition, and the team that was behind lost possesion because of this play. In this case, I'm not advocating ball-watching, but I do think all three officials need to make sure they are aware of everything going on. What's your answer to A's coach when he comes up to the crew after the game and he asks, "How can THREE officials not see something that happened in the open court?". I know the wrong answer would be, "It's not my area, coach". Again, in this case I don't think our credibility went up because one of our partners missed a call, and the other two "did their job" by "staying in their area".

I think that's why jbduke asked the question - I'm going to assume they know if this play happens in the second quarter, it's the C's call to live and die with, the C was in the wrong position, and the T and L have other players to watch. However, in this case, with the game on the line, I would rather the correct call come from someone else, rather than just letting it go in the name of "staying in your area". This would be one of those exceptions to the rule.