double whistle and 2 different calls...

[JohnBark]

how do you vets handle a double whistle with 2 different calls? was in a game recently when A1 as doubleteamed at top of the key. i was trail and the play was in my area. my partner and i blew the whistle at the same time (double whistle). i had double dribble and he had held ball. we came together. i told him that only A1 had her hands on the ball and that it couldn't be a held ball and that A1 dribble was the second dribble thus it's a violation for double dribble. but he insisted. so, since he has 10 years more experience, i let his call stand.

but, i was wondering how much you "argue" with your partner about the correct call after coming together? Especially with an official who has more experience than you. i didn't want to make the situation worse by insisting on a violation call. which was the correct call and was in my "area" of responsibility to call. i guess we should have pre-gamed this double whistle situation better. but, how would you handle this situation?

thanks!

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by JohnBark

how do you vets handle a double whistle with 2 different calls? was in a game recently when A1 as doubleteamed at top of the key. i was trail and the play was in my area. my partner and i blew the whistle at the same time (double whistle). i had double dribble and he had held ball. we came together. i told him that only A1 had her hands on the ball and that it couldn't be a held ball and that A1 dribble was the second dribble thus it's a violation for double dribble. but he insisted. so, since he has 10 years more experience, i let his call stand.

but, i was wondering how much you "argue" with your partner about the correct call after coming together? Especially with an official who has more experience than you. i didn't want to make the situation worse by insisting on a violation call. which was the correct call and was in my "area" of responsibility to call. i guess we should have pre-gamed this double whistle situation better. but, how would you handle this situation?

thanks!

I agree it should have been pre-gamed. Let's stay in our primary, other than that. We would have gone with the illegal dribble. Without regards to how many years she/he may have RESPECT THE CALL!!!! At the half, we would have had a discussion on who's watching who's area.

[JRutledge]

I tend to be more inclined to call the held ball, especially if my partner is really insisting on that call. That is a much safer call and it is harder to dispute the call.

Now this was your call based on the coverage areas, but there are always exceptions to this rule. Also the circle area is an area where all officials are likely looking under the right circumstances. I guess it depends on the angle either of you have on the play that would ultimately be the decision on whose call you go with.

I know people might not like this, but if a veteran is really insistent they got the call right, I am likely going to go with their call. The reason for that is if the veteran is respected I would rather them take the heat for a call like this because they could handle it better. We are a team, but just like a football team the QB gets more of the credit for things that go good or bad. On a non-game changing play I will likely differ to the veteran.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

I have to agree with JRut - since this was a non-important call (in the grand scheme of things), I would defer to the official who is most insistent. I'm not sure I would automatically defer to them just because they were a senior official, but because we look better as a crew not standing on the floor arguing amongst ourselves. But I would certainly have that discussion at halftime, or after the game, as to why my partner would be making such a call in my area. Perhaps it really was in the "gray area" JRut mentions. Perhaps you were too close to the play and didn't see it like everyone else in the gym. Or, perhaps, my partner was (in their mind) trying too hard to help out a less-experienced partner. But spend as little time as possible discussing the call on the floor - pick one and go with it. Then see if that can be avoided in the future.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I have to agree with JRut - since this was a non-important call (in the grand scheme of things),

Can you guys explain to me how a call which determines who gets the ball and potentially changes the arrow is "non-important"?

John - get together & go with what seems right with as little discussion as possible. I would be tempted to give this call to the T since he has a better view of the top of the key, but there would be times I might defer if the L was 118% sure and could explain with a little better than "'cause I said so". But don't base your decision on who's been working longer.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Can you guys explain to me how a call which determines who gets the ball and potentially changes the arrow is "non-important"?.

Yes, I agree, every call and no-call we make is important during a game. My point was a discussion over a violation in the second quarter has a lot less realistic importance than that same call in a tie game with under a minute.

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

John - get together & go with what seems right with as little discussion as possible. I would be tempted to give this call to the T since he has a better view of the top of the key, but there would be times I might defer if the L was 118% sure and could explain with a little better than "'cause I said so". But don't base your decision on who's been working longer.

The only difference is I would defer if the L was 121% sure, but otherwise, I agree.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

Non-Important Call: If the arrow goes to the Team B and they score a 3 pointer and win by one point and you not sticking with the "right" call took a possession away form Team A in which they may have scored. Get the call right and leave your egos in the locker room, especially as in this case that veteran official was wrong.

Personally I do not know how you would have a double dribble with hands of the defender all over the ball to the point there is a held ball seen by another official. I did not see the play, but I would be glad that someone felt that there was something else taking place in such a close play like that. If I call a double dribble and it was not there, that is going to be a much more scrutinized call than any held ball. You better get that call right. The problem is you are coming at this about egos, I am talking about survival. I could give a damn about the egos involved. But if you are the younger, less respected official calling a violation that is not there, who do you think is not going to get the benefit of the doubt? Who do you think might not be working anymore in that conference for making a possible big call on something that is border line at best? You tell me.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

If you are the younger/less experienced official and you have the stones to stick with your call in a tough situation in the face of adversity a supervisor will respect you even more. If you give that call up the supervisor might look at you as a pushover.

From your response, it sounds like you are worried about your ego. I thought ego was not important?

In my experience the assignors usually put more pressure on the veteran to keep things from getting out of hand. I know I have been asked to be the "lead" official because of who my partner or partners are. And I know when I work with older and more accomplished officials, they were told similar things when I have worked with them. I am just addressing a trick of the trade. If you think you have all the answers, by all means make a bigger deal out of a double whistle and see what happens.

Peace

[mick]

We don't argue at all.
We quickly discuss.

[For this interpretation, I am assuming your partner is not an official that trys to make every call on every part of the floor. 10 yr. officials should be better than that.]

Where was the ball? Could you see it clearly the entire time? Were you ever partially screened by the action? Was there any chance that a defender touched the ball ?

Assuming the play happened as you say but you momentarily lost sight of the ball:

• One of the two defenders may have touched the ball and the play was getting ugly. Your partner may have thought there "may have been a foul", but didn't clearly see one. So, in order to reset (stop an ugly play) he called a held ball.
• You were not totally sure that a defender's hand was, or was not, on the ball, or that the ball handler thought the ball was hit out of the ball handler's hands. But you clearly saw the ball handler start a second dribble.

My guess is that you did not have a continuous, full view of the ball, or your partner would not have called the held ball.

If there actually was a held ball that you did not see, the held ball had to have occured before the 2nd dribble. Going with the held ball was a good idea.

[Junker]

If we have a double whistle working 2 man at the top of the key, I take the call from T no matter what. L shouldn't be looking at the top of the key. If they are, they are not doing their job correctly.

[tomegun]

Did you ask your partner about this play after the game? If so, what did he/she say?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

JRut,
You are right I don't agree or like your reply. Our main goal is to always get the call right. If it is in my primary and I am positive it is a double dribble we may discuss the call but we will go with the double dribble. As for yielding to the veteran official just because you are a veteran doesn't mean that official is respected or a better official than the less experienced official. Veteran make mistake just like younger officials, your reasoning is all flawed IMO.

When you have disagreements you have to resolve them. If both officials equally think their call is right, who is right? Are you going to go to the video tape? Are you going to sit there for 5 minutes and argue the situation? Of course our goal is to "get it right" but that has limitations.

Also I did not say who was better. Who is better is very subjective. So if you want to get along and have that veteran support you later, you better learn to "play the game" or you might find yourself having many other calls questioned or without a lot of support. I guess this experience I have has taught me some things.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

We need to supports each other on every call we are a team and need stay together. "Play the game" that comment is horse crap and you know it! So I should just bow down and kiss the veteran's ring before the game and carry their bags in and out of the gym, give me a break. You say “get the call right” is always our goal but you better “play the game” with your partners for their support, their support should be there unconditionally.

You come off to me as a person that thinks everything in life is fair. That is a noble position, but often not true. I never said anything about bowing down to anyone. I am saying if a veteran is so sure about a call, I am not going to go against them so I will take all the heat for a possible mistake. If I am the younger official and I am wrong, there are many veterans that will not support you when it is all said and done. When I say "play the game" that means that you should also look at the bigger picture. You have two officials that disagree. Someone has to give up the call. We both cannot be right. I am just going to defer to the person that has the trust of the assignor and coaches and let them take the heat if they are wrong. Not many people are going to be mad at a younger official if they defer to a more experienced person. Younger officials do not have the same margin for error.

Peace

[agmattbballref]

Sorry to reopen an old thread, but I often read old threads in my spare time to learn and entertain myself....(I know but Korea can be a lonely place at times). I read this thread and it reminded me of a similar situation that happened to me in one of a varsity game about two years ago and I really felt bad for differing to the veteran official even though I knew I was right...but because he was the veteran I differed against my better judgement. Here is the sitch...

I have a loose ball in my area and both a1 and b1 go to the floor and go for the ball...I step in quickly and call for the ball... clearly after the whistle and as the players are returning to their feet, b1 shoves a1. I signal a technical foul on the offender, b1. A teammate of a1 who is bench personnel leaves the bench area and runs all the way to half court before my partner cuts him off. An action which should have warranted an automatic ejection. Instead, my partner approached me and said that if I eject the player for leaving the bench area, then I would be duty bound to eject b1 for shoving a1 since his actions resulted in a1 teammate leaving the bench area....I felt sure that I had applied the rules correctly and my rulings were in line with the intent of the rules and the spirit of the game, yet I allowed the veteran official to talk me out of the call mainly because it had no impact on the games, as the outcome of the game had already been decided....Just thought I would share this since this thread reminded me of the situation...

[Nevadaref]

I don't think that your partner was correct in this particular situation, but if you read the following rule and give it some thought, you will see why he told you what he did.

RULE 4, SECTION 18 FIGHTING
Fighting is a flagrant act and can occur when the ball is dead or live. Fighting includes, but is not limited to combative acts such as:
ART. 1 . . . An attempt to strike, punch or kick an opponent with a fist, hands, arms, legs or feet regardless of whether contact is made.
ART. 2 . . . An attempt to instigate a fight by committing an unsporting act toward an opponent that causes an opponent to retaliate by fighting.


I don't like this rule for reasons such as your situation. What if the kid who ran off the bench, A6, got all the way to the players and punched B1 in the face? The rule would seem to apply and B1 would receive a flagrant technical foul for fighting instead of a normal player technical foul for committing an unsporting foul. This sounds ridiculous, but we had a similar incident here last season and our state office contacted Mary Struckhoff in Indy and was told that is the correct application of the rule and the intent of it.

BTW, since you seem like a good guy who is working hard over there in Korea and someone who seeks to better himself, I'll let you know that the word you intended to use in your post is "defer": intransitive verb : to submit to another's wishes, opinion, or governance usually through deference or respect <deferred to her father's wishes> Inflected Form(s): deferred; deferring

Take care.