LSU/Stanford charge (Women's)

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Well since I work HS games with some officials who work NCAA-W and some who work NCAA-M and some who work neither, it's something that needs to be pre-gamed. That's my point. Did I imply that you didn't ? Just b/c you thoroughly pre-game it doesn't mean everyone else on this forum does.

My point is officials come into games with different philosophies/mechanics. I worked a girls' regional HS play-off game with 2 members of another board who both work NCAA-W and guess what happened at the end of the 1st quarter. We had no whistle to kill the quarter because I was the C, but tableside, and the trail, opposite table, was thinking about the NCAA-W mechanic instead NFHS. But I blamed myself immediately b/c I was the "R" and I knew I was working with 2 NCAA-W officials and I forgot to cover last second shot responsibilities in my pre-game.

BTW Rocky, the Sigh... and...why is this so hard to understand? were unnecessary.

Things have changed around here. It's anything goes. It isn't about helping each other understand things, it's about I'm right-you're wrong and you're an @ss for have an differing opinion.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

BTW Rocky, the Sigh... and...why is this so hard to understand? were unnecessary.

Oh, ok...but the highlighting my name and saying it was my philosophy were ok with you?

And as for your playoff game, it wasn't your fault...those two partners need to be able to remember what level they are working and which mechanics are being used that night. If they can't remember that it's a NFHS game tonight, then shame on them.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Oh, ok...but the highlighting my name and saying it was my philosophy were ok with you?

Wasn't meant to be an insult, just an illustration that you are viewing the Stanford/LSU play with one set of eyes (whether it's based on mechanics, philosophy, or past experience is really of no consequence) and Nate was viewing with another. Your post was actually the best argument/explanation I read backing the Trail having a whistle, that's why I used you as an example.

I'm guessing 99% of the forum is not Elite 8 level, but seeing and discussing the different plays these Elite 8 officials are involved in then hearing different opinions and philosophies (they may be mechanic-based, but still IMO philosophies) will hopefully help each one of us when faced with similar plays in the future.

And yes, my partner should have remembered, but with officials jumping back and forth between different mechanics and rules, it's forsee-able that is could happen. Therefore, I felt I should have reminded my partners about last-shot responsibilities.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I don't disagree with what you're saying, but I don't think that you're fully understanding what I've been trying to say either. And I think that M&M has basically been saying the same thing.

Nobody wants to see a cheap foul called at the end of the game. It sureasheck should be a good foul if you're gonna call one then. But.....you should be making the exact same determination at the 7-minute mark as you do at the 39-minute mark- i.e. was it a righteous foul both times? If it isn't, then you shouldn't be calling it at the 7-minute mark either.

That's the "school of thought" and philosophy being espoused by some high-level officials imo. It's only "game-changing" if you call something that has been consistently let go up to then, or if you ignore something that has been called consistently up to then.

OK, try this on for the sake of consistency. The game changes on a continual basis. Substitutions, style of play, score, foul count etc. How about a situation where players are getting frustrated and are starting to get chippy. Most of the crews I have had the priviledge of working with, will address it by saying we need to tighten it up. So according to you they are not being consistent because they have had to change the way the game needs to be called.

What if a team is fouling to get back into the game? You are definitely not calling the same contact late as you did early. We are charged with judging contact within the context of the game at that particular moment.

We have all been in games similar to the situation here and dealt with it differently. If the teams have been killing each other all night, we might make a call with slightly less contact, if the teams have been playing great all night, we might let more contact go.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Wasn't meant to be an insult, just an illustration that you are viewing the Stanford/LSU play with one set of eyes (whether it's based on mechanics, philosophy, or past experience is really of no consequence) and Nate was viewing with another. Your post was actually the best argument/explanation I read backing the Trail having a whistle, that's why I used you as an example.

.

Gotcha...my bad. Just seems like it was explained back on page 3 or so and then keeps coming back up...oh well.

And to Nate1224, not once have I called anyone an a$$ or any other name in this thread, so don't use me as your example.

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

OK, try this on for the sake of consistency. The game changes on a continual basis. Substitutions, style of play, score, foul count etc. How about a situation where players are getting frustrated and are starting to get chippy. Most of the crews I have had the priviledge of working with, will address it by saying we need to tighten it up. So according to you they are not being consistent because they have had to change the way the game needs to be called.

What if a team is fouling to get back into the game? You are definitely not calling the same contact late as you did early. We are charged with judging contact within the context of the game at that particular moment.

We have all been in games similar to the situation here and dealt with it differently. If the teams have been killing each other all night, we might make a call with slightly less contact, if the teams have been playing great all night, we might let more contact go.

What's not being understood here is that by saying that your trying to stay consistent you are already admitting that your not. I agree with you completely. How often do you see games that start out with tic-tac fouls and eventually loosen up..or just the opposite. Officials are adapting to styles of play and that won't always allow you to call the first 10 minutes like you do the last 10, much less the last 10 seconds.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

OK, try this on for the sake of consistency. The game changes on a continual basis. Substitutions, style of play, score, foul count etc. How about a situation where players are getting frustrated and are starting to get chippy. Most of the crews I have had the priviledge of working with, will address it by saying we need to tighten it up. So according to you they are not being consistent because they have had to change the way the game needs to be called.

What if a team is fouling to get back into the game? You are definitely not calling the same contact late as you did early. We are charged with judging contact within the context of the game at that particular moment.

Where did I say anything at all like that?

You're talking about different circumstances and situations completely.

Answer me this one.....after you "tighten up", is it then OK to "loosen up" on the very last play of the game? Or should you stay "tightened up"?

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Gotcha...my bad. Just seems like it was explained back on page 3 or so and then keeps coming back up...oh well.

And to Nate1224, not once have I called anyone an a$$ or any other name in this thread, so don't use me as your example.

Nope not you. Didn't mean to appear to use you as an example. SORRY. It's just that some of us are explaining our OPINIONS and some of us are imposing our opinions. Sorry again wasn't at all meaning you.

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Where did I say anything at all like that?

You're talking about different circumstances and situations completely.

Answer me this one.....after you "tighten up", is it then OK to "loosen up" on the very last play of the game? Or should you stay "tightened up"?

Possibly. Suppose this: at the 15 min. mark of the first half you have two teams that are getting rough. Lots of talking and nonsense going on after the play. You speak to the players about cleaning it up. You come together with your crew and decided that by calling it tighter, the problem will take care of itself. You finish out the rest of the half with no problems and continue into the second half. If play has settled down, would it then be wrong to loosen back up a little????

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Where did I say anything at all like that?

You're talking about different circumstances and situations completely.

Answer me this one.....after you "tighten up", is it then OK to "loosen up" on the very last play of the game? Or should you stay "tightened up"?

You were the one who brought up consistency. As far as different situations, end of game situations are different than the rest of the game.

Answer: If we have been calling it tight in those moments before the last play of the game, we stay there.

[tomegun]

JR, I'm just going to call the game from the "roota to the toota" - that means from the beginning to the end.

All this talk about tight and loose is poo poo to me. Every game is different and we have to adjudicate (nice word) it accordingly.

At the end of the day - and the end of this thread - what would make you feel better:

1. passing on this call when many have admitted it looked like an offensive foul in real time
2. make the call and deal with the evaluators

I would take #2 all day long. Most great things or great people do not happen by being PASSive.

[All_Heart]

Originally Posted by Nate1224hoops

I understand your point and follow clearly. No there hadn't been any other palming violations called in the UNCON game and no advantage was gained, but it was palming.

I think I remember a palming violation called early in this game.

[Nate1224hoops]

Originally Posted by All_Heart

I think I remember a palming violation called early in this game.

Don't think so, but I may have missed it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

You were the one who brought up consistency. As far as different situations, end of game situations are different than the rest of the game.

If we have been calling it tight in those moments before the last play of the game, we stay there.

Why would you stay there?

If "end of game" situations are different, then why would you call it the same ol' consistent way that you have been instead of loosening up?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by tomegun

JR, I'm just going to call the game from the "roota to the toota" - that means from the beginning to the end.

That's just what I try to do also....hopefully....