Coverage Areas

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

I I guess my question is - Why? Isn't the primary responsibility of the officials (beyond the issue of safety) to make sure the game is officiated fairly and the rules are administered correctly? If you are consistently focussed on your primary, and happen to see something outside it that a partner could have been screened from, why shouldn't you call it? Just because that is how the mechanics of basketball are set up? Shouldn't we be more concerned with getting the call right between partners than who is calling what where?

There are two extremes: "Call what you see, no matter where" and "Only call in your area." Both are, imo, wrong.

According to some studies, a large percentage of calls made outside your area are wrong.

Conversely, you don't want to pass on an "OMG" call just because it wasn't in your area.

The key is knowing when to go get something, and when to let it go.

[drinkeii]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

There are two extremes: "Call what you see, no matter where" and "Only call in your area." Both are, imo, wrong.

According to some studies, a large percentage of calls made outside your area are wrong.

Conversely, you don't want to pass on an "OMG" call just because it wasn't in your area.

The key is knowing when to go get something, and when to let it go.

I'd be interested to see these "studies" - never heard anything like that before.

Problem is, with your last statement, that most guys I work with are of the "My Call, RIGHT OR WRONG" attitude - if I choose not to call it, or missed it, you don't have a right to call it in my area.

Interestingly enough - the rules state that each official has the authority to make calls. The rules DON'T state anything about where they can make calls on the floor. The case book doesn't address the issue either. So the rules of the game don't prohibit these calls. The mechanics of officiating the sport is where we find this, not in the actual rules of the sport.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

I'd be interested to see these "studies" - never heard anything like that before.

Problem is, with your last statement, that most guys I work with are of the "My Call, RIGHT OR WRONG" attitude - if I choose not to call it, or missed it, you don't have a right to call it in my area.

Interestingly enough - the rules state that each official has the authority to make calls. The rules DON'T state anything about where they can make calls on the floor. The case book doesn't address the issue either. So the rules of the game don't prohibit these calls. The mechanics of officiating the sport is where we find this, not in the actual rules of the sport.

It's the NBA's study of their own officials. More like a report card, if you will. In grading the officials, they did a statistical analysis of the calls made in and out of a given official's primary area. They determined that calls made out of your area (in your partner's pond) were far more likely to be wrong than calls in your own primary.

Think about this next time your partner goes fishing in your pond and calls something that didn't happen (phantom fouls, travels, and double dribbles.) Ego isn't want should keep you in your primary; the desire to get the call right should do that. That doesn't mean there won't be some plays where you won't have to do it; but you should be willing to stake money that your call is right before you make it.

[drinkeii]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It's the NBA's study of their own officials. More like a report card, if you will. In grading the officials, they did a statistical analysis of the calls made in and out of a given official's primary area. They determined that calls made out of your area (in your partner's pond) were far more likely to be wrong than calls in your own primary.

Think about this next time your partner goes fishing in your pond and calls something that didn't happen (phantom fouls, travels, and double dribbles.) Ego isn't want should keep you in your primary; the desire to get the call right should do that. That doesn't mean there won't be some plays where you won't have to do it; but you should be willing to stake money that your call is right before you make it.

Do you have a link to this study? Also, does the study consider the fact that in the NBA, officials are not calling a game for anything other than entertaining the fans - the number of obvious "minor" things that are ignored for the sake of allowing the game to flow is pretty significant. I would be more likely to believe a study by college leagues than the NBA.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

Do you have a link to this study? Also, does the study consider the fact that in the NBA, officials are not calling a game for anything other than entertaining the fans - the number of obvious "minor" things that are ignored for the sake of allowing the game to flow is pretty significant. I would be more likely to believe a study by college leagues than the NBA.

First of all the NBA can come up with any rules and philosophies that they like. It is a league unto itself, no different than any other pro league. I do not see where you are going with that one. NCAA players are not as talented as NBA players and you cannot have the exact same ways to call a game as you do with the NBA.

Secondly, if you do not have coverage areas, you will have people calling all kinds of things that are not in position to call. Forget coverage areas, what about something as simple as an out of bounds call. Do you think a person across the court is in a better position to a toe on the line? There is a reason there are 2 or 3 of you out there.

Peace

[drinkeii]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

First of all the NBA can come up with any rules and philosophies that they like. It is a league unto itself, no different than any other pro league. I do not see where you are going with that one. NBA players are not as talented as NCAA players and you cannot have the exact same ways to call a game as you do with the NBA.

Secondly, if you do not have coverage areas, you will have people calling all kinds of things that are not in position to call. Forget coverage areas, what about something as simple as an out of bounds call. Do you think a person across the court is in a better position to a toe on the line? There is a reason there are 2 or 3 of you out there.

Peace

But in the NBA, an official who actually calls by the rules (rather than by the philosophy of making a good game for the fans) would never keep his job for long. That is where I am going - As referees, our job is to keep trying to get better, and improve our calling of the game. This means studying the rules and cases, brushing up on mechanics, etc.

The problem I have with this idea is that some people are so gung-ho for coverage areas that they don't want you calling anything in their area period. Are we, or are we not, out there to get the calls right? Some people i have worked with say "Well, if I miss it, too bad... i missed it, but you still shouldn't have called it". And we do the out of bounds thing all the time - i agree that the closest official would be more likely to judge the toe on the line, but we help each other all the time on tips or deflections which change what would be the direction the ball is going when it hits out of bounds.

No coverage areas would be bad. I believe that 100% (or even close to it) adherance to coverage areas is just as bad. I want my partner to call things I might miss, if they're in my area, and I want to have the same ability with other partners. Top priority should be "get the call right" - not "protect your valuable fishing area".

In an officials meeting recently, I was told, directly when asked, if I was supposed to pass on a foul/violation that I observed from a distance, and my partner missed, and I was certain they missed it, that I should not call it. This was by the rules interpreter. What happened to getting the call right? I was told it is his call to make or miss.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

1) But in the NBA, an official who actually calls by the rules (rather than by the philosophy of making a good game for the fans) would never keep his job for long. That is where I am going - As referees, our job is to keep trying to get better, and improve our calling of the game. This means studying the rules and cases, brushing up on mechanics, etc.


2) In an officials meeting recently, I was told, directly when asked, if I was supposed to pass on a foul/violation that I observed from a distance, and my partner missed, and I was certain they missed it, that I should not call it. This was by the rules interpreter. What happened to getting the call right? I was told it is his call to make or miss.

1) David, you have no idea how much hard work and study is required daily of NBA officials. They make all of us look like slackers. They are also constantly being second-guessed; every single call that they make is graded. There is simply no comparison between the pro and amateur games.

2) I agree, David. You just keep calling in your partner's area. T'heck with your rules interpreter. What does he know? And btw, good luck in your soccer-officiating career.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

But in the NBA, an official who actually calls by the rules (rather than by the philosophy of making a good game for the fans) would never keep his job for long. That is where I am going - As referees, our job is to keep trying to get better, and improve our calling of the game. This means studying the rules and cases, brushing up on mechanics, etc.

Based on this comment, I really think you have no idea what goes on with the NBA or what the rules are. The rules in the NBA are not as ridged or as black and white. The NBA goes over all aspects of the rules in ways you would never understand. The NBA officials are not forced to just read a rulebook and never talk to the creators of the rules on a regular basis. The NBA officials have an internet meeting every single day, where plays are reviewed and they know what were good calls and bad calls in every single game they officiate. The NCAA or the NF (or state associations) have no such communication between the rules makers and the officials on a monthly basis let alone a daily basis to go over good plays and bad plays from the officials.

Originally Posted by drinkeii

The problem I have with this idea is that some people are so gung-ho for coverage areas that they don't want you calling anything in their area period. Are we, or are we not, out there to get the calls right? Some people i have worked with say "Well, if I miss it, too bad... i missed it, but you still shouldn't have called it". And we do the out of bounds thing all the time - i agree that the closest official would be more likely to judge the toe on the line, but we help each other all the time on tips or deflections which change what would be the direction the ball is going when it hits out of bounds.

You have a right to believe what you want to, but calling stuff all over the court does not make it right. You mentioned that you work other sports other than basketball. I can tell you I would be totally wrong if I went around in those sports and starting calling things I "thought" I saw and was not in position to call. I am a Back Judge on my football crew and I know I do not see things with the line of scrimmage or line play issues. It would be just as wrong for a base umpire to call balls and strikes from a position where you cannot see the plate clearly. Just because you "think" you saw something, does not mean you actually did see what your partner saw. Get it right does not mean that you "got it right" if you partner saw the entire play and you are not watching your area.

Originally Posted by drinkeii

No coverage areas would be bad. I believe that 100% (or even close to it) adherance to coverage areas is just as bad. I want my partner to call things I might miss, if they're in my area, and I want to have the same ability with other partners. Top priority should be "get the call right" - not "protect your valuable fishing area".

No it is not. If I am watching my area, especially when the ball is not around me, I personally do not want to watch the ball because the problems are going to start off-ball. It is easy to watch the ball and if we think there is a travel you can call it. What is hard to do is to stay off-ball and watch things that will creep up into the game much later. If you are not watching your coverage area and roaming, you might just miss the very thing that brings your game into the toilet. It is also one thing to call something that is in a trouble area where two primary coverage areas overlap. It is another thing all together to call something that your partner was watching the entire time. Also at least in 3 man, if you want to get plays right, move and you will be in better position when things change.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

NBA players are not as talented as NCAA players and you cannot have the exact same ways to call a game as you do with the NBA.

I've been saying that for years.

[Back In The Saddle]

From having played both basketball and soccer, and having reffed basketball, I'd have to say there are some interesting differences. And I think they all have something to do with the restrictive size of the basketball court.

Simply because there are so many bodies in such a small area, you will have more contact than on a soccer field. So there are more incidents that need to be judged. At some point it becomes necessary to more formally divide the responsibility.

Because of the constant proximity of the players, a good basketball team continuously screens and cuts to get players open and the defense is constantly moving around screens and switching. There is so much going on all the time in a basketball game. I have never seen that much off ball action in soccer. Perhaps that's because I never played above high school?

There is also a different tradition, and thus perception of making calls "in front of your partner" in basketball. Many coaches know the officials' areas and get quite upset if they know you're calling out of your area. And it's not always just trying to play you off your partner. If a coach sees his players getting hammered off-ball and sees that both of you are watching on-ball, he's got a legitimate gripe.

Then there is the consistency issue. If you've been calling contact in your area consistently, and your partner occassionally reaches in and grabs something that you've been passing on all night, it ruins your consistency.

And as others have cited, the NBA and the NCAA have both conducted studies that show a large percentage of calls outside an official's primary are incorrect. Much of that, I believe, stems from not seeing the whole play develop. You can get in a lot of trouble if you're making calls on plays you've only seen part of.

But everything I have mentioned is a generality. Some games and teams don't generate near the amount of contact or activity. Partners do get screened out or lose angles on plays. Things do happen in partner's areas away from the ball. Occassionally a partner suffers vapor lock on a must-get play right in front of him. Stuff happens.

Any well designed set of hard and fast rules about calling in or out of an area will likely be right most of the time, and wrong some of the time. So I tend to take a progressive approach to calling outside my area:

• If it happens any where in my area, it's my call. I want to be the one to make it.
• If it happens in the gray area, and there is any doubt as to whether my partner saw it, I will call it.
• If it happens in the key, and there is any doubt as to whether my partner saw it, I may call it.
• If it happens away from the ball in my partner's area, I might call it.
• If it happens on-ball in my partner's area, I won't call it unless somebody loses a limb and it is completely obvious that my partner couldn't see it happen.

So other than traditional double-coverage areas (the gray area, the key), the farther it is into my partner's area it is, the less likely I am to call it. The closer to being on-ball it is in my partner's area, the less likely I am to call it. If it's on-ball in my partner's area, I am extremely unlikely to call it.

But there are some exceptions to those generalities as well. Curl plays going to the basket and away from my partner, I'll help if I clearly see a foul on the back side or from a secondary defender. A block/charge call involving a secondary defender I'll help with. Pass and crashes, we're supposed to divide coverage irrespective of areas.

Then there are times when you need to expand your area into your partner's to help out. When lead goes out wide, trail has lead's post. When the lead's area is empty, he expands to cover off-ball in trail's area. There are probably others too.

And lastly none of that matters if there are things of interest to be watched in my own area, which is normally the case, because I'll be watching that. So normally I'm not watching my partner's area. Sometimes I do see into my partner's area. Occassionally I should be looking into my partner's area.

Two-person basketball mechanics is everlastingly a game of intelligent trade-offs. You cannot be successful by staying in your area every moment. And IMHO any official who says "never fish in my pond" doesn't understand two-person mechanics. And IMHO any official who doesn't understand that going out of your area is risky equally misunderstands two-person.

[drinkeii]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

From having played both basketball and soccer, and having reffed basketball, I'd have to say there are some interesting differences. And I think they all have something to do with the restrictive size of the basketball court.

Simply because there are so many bodies in such a small area, you will have more contact than on a soccer field. So there are more incidents that need to be judged. At some point it becomes necessary to more formally divide the responsibility.

Because of the constant proximity of the players, a good basketball team continuously screens and cuts to get players open and the defense is constantly moving around screens and switching. There is so much going on all the time in a basketball game. I have never seen that much off ball action in soccer. Perhaps that's because I never played above high school?

There is also a different tradition, and thus perception of making calls "in front of your partner" in basketball. Many coaches know the officials' areas and get quite upset if they know you're calling out of your area. And it's not always just trying to play you off your partner. If a coach sees his players getting hammered off-ball and sees that both of you are watching on-ball, he's got a legitimate gripe.

Then there is the consistency issue. If you've been calling contact in your area consistently, and your partner occassionally reaches in and grabs something that you've been passing on all night, it ruins your consistency.

And as others have cited, the NBA and the NCAA have both conducted studies that show a large percentage of calls outside an official's primary are incorrect. Much of that, I believe, stems from not seeing the whole play develop. You can get in a lot of trouble if you're making calls on plays you've only seen part of.

But everything I have mentioned is a generality. Some games and teams don't generate near the amount of contact or activity. Partners do get screened out or lose angles on plays. Things do happen in partner's areas away from the ball. Occassionally a partner suffers vapor lock on a must-get play right in front of him. Stuff happens.

Any well designed set of hard and fast rules about calling in or out of an area will likely be right most of the time, and wrong some of the time. So I tend to take a progressive approach to calling outside my area:

• If it happens any where in my area, it's my call. I want to be the one to make it.
• If it happens in the gray area, and there is any doubt as to whether my partner saw it, I will call it.
• If it happens in the key, and there is any doubt as to whether my partner saw it, I may call it.
• If it happens away from the ball in my partner's area, I might call it.
• If it happens on-ball in my partner's area, I won't call it unless somebody loses a limb and it is completely obvious that my partner couldn't see it happen.

So other than traditional double-coverage areas (the gray area, the key), the farther it is into my partner's area it is, the less likely I am to call it. The closer to being on-ball it is in my partner's area, the less likely I am to call it. If it's on-ball in my partner's area, I am extremely unlikely to call it.

But there are some exceptions to those generalities as well. Curl plays going to the basket and away from my partner, I'll help if I clearly see a foul on the back side or from a secondary defender. A block/charge call involving a secondary defender I'll help with. Pass and crashes, we're supposed to divide coverage irrespective of areas.

Then there are times when you need to expand your area into your partner's to help out. When lead goes out wide, trail has lead's post. When the lead's area is empty, he expands to cover off-ball in trail's area. There are probably others too.

And lastly none of that matters if there are things of interest to be watched in my own area, which is normally the case, because I'll be watching that. So normally I'm not watching my partner's area. Sometimes I do see into my partner's area. Occassionally I should be looking into my partner's area.

Two-person basketball mechanics is everlastingly a game of intelligent trade-offs. You cannot be successful by staying in your area every moment. And IMHO any official who says "never fish in my pond" doesn't understand two-person mechanics. And IMHO any official who doesn't understand that going out of your area is risky equally misunderstands two-person.

Very well written - and I have to say, I do agree. Thanks!

[OHBBREF]

BIS great disertation - I am going to add this to my pre game review

What you address is very important,
1) consistancy,
2) seeing the whole play,
3) if you are watching your partners area who's watching your area?
4) patience

Last night working a JC scrimmage I was the slot with a player driving to the basket from my primary after he gathers the ball to shoot a jumper, he gets bumped, I wait because he is going up.
But nooooo, the lead comes across the lane and gets the call on the primary defender, and has it on the floor.
Bad lead!
Offense didn't get the basket or the free throw - and then turned the ball over.
Bad lead!