Philosophy
 

My partner and I discussed philosophy before the game last night. (I worked the game with another woman, which is always nice.)

She and I both played, her experience much more recent than mine. We discussed letting the players play the game. I talked about how another partner in a previous game called blocking fouls I didn't agree with. A player receives the ball, then turns and starts dribbling. A defender is in legal position but in direct line to the basket and the dribbler tries to go past. The defender leans to avoid the collision but the dribbler trips over the foot. The defender has no chance to get out of the way and isn't illegal to start with. My previous partner called that a blocking foul every time. I consider it incidental contact, if anything.

My partner last night agreed. Do you? What do you do in a game where one partner is calling those and you don't? Do you adapt for consistency as a team? Or do you just hope for the best, hoping you covered everything in pregame?

Rita

Hi, Rita. Hope your season is going well. It IS always nice to work with another woman, and I think it's good for the girls (players) to see women continuing in sports after hs.

About your play, I think I'd have had to see it. Generally, if a defender leans, it's a foul, but there also needs to be contact, and enough contact to be a foul. So it's hard to say what I'd do if I were there. If the dribbler's only problem was the trip, and the leaning didn't cause anything, I'd probably let it go. If the foot didn't move, it was probably legal, if my picture from your description is accurate.

About differing philosophies, you have to first match your philosophy to the body of refs in your area, which it is to be hoped matches the general NFHS philosophy. If you feel confident that your judgment (which is what we're talking about in your case play) is within the prescribed thinking of your assignor, then your partner has to be the one to ultimately face the music. If he's saying that whenever the dribbler trips over a defender he calls it a block, regardless of whether or not the defender had LGP, then he's dead wrong. And you shouldn't match that no matter what. You might even want to report him to your assignor, depending on how the politics work in your area.

But when it's a philosophy about how to handle a blow-out, or how to deal with rough play, or how to keep a difficult coach in line, matching is a good thing. Also, defining advantage/disadvantage on borderline plays is good to match up if you can get a sneak peek at some of his borderline calls.

If you finally can't match at all, and things are just looking way unfair, you can try to arrange it so that you're always under the basket, or he's always under the basket, so the same ref is getting first crack at the same plays. At least this is how I've tried to handle it when P and I are calling the same things at all.

Why does the defender lean away from the dribbler.
I don't think I have seen that before.

oh, duh. Defender leaned away. No way this is a foul.

mick, she leaned away because she's young and inexperienced, and she doesn't get the "take a charge" thing yet. She'll either get it, or she won't play next year.

7th grade boys. First game. He would have been trying to avoid a collision when he realized a collision was happening.

The whole point is that we don't have to call a foul just because a collision or a fall happens. This guy calls fouls almost every time someone goes down.

Rita

If the offensive player has the ball, and the defender isn't taking a dive, I'd say that you should have a foul call most of the time if there's a collision and one of them is going down. That just ain't incidental contact the majority of the time imo. One of them is getting some kind of advantage when there's that much contact-- either the dribbler knocking the defender out of his way or the defender stopping the dribbler from getting to the basket.

I'm with Jurassic. One of the assigners I call for says that if one hits the floor in most cases there needs to be a fouled called. The other one; well, he's never seen me call, we just kind of do our own thing.

Rita I agree with the block call. Anytime a player trips another player or feet get tangled up I am calling a tripping foul. Accidental or not, LGP or not. Players are more sly than we give them credit for. Think about this play:

A1 sprinting up the floor dribbling. B1 trailing just behind and to the left. Well B1's man is on the other side of the floor so he/she decides to go right behind A1 and they tangle up feet and A1 goes to the ground and loses the ball, but it didn't look like B1 was trying to do that on purpose. This is one form of a tripping foul that I call everytime regardless of intent.

Another one:

A1 dribbling with B1 in legal guarding position. A1 shakes left and comes back right. While A1 attempts to go by B1, B1 opens up his leg (inner thigh part sticking out toward defender) and A1 goes to the ground. I don't care whether B1 has legal guarding position or not that is a non-basketball defensive move used by people who are too lazy to move and hope that the player will trip and the refs will deem it incidental contact.

Now I'm not saying everything is written in concrete with what I'm saying. There has been instances where I have passed on a trip for one reason or another (maybe I just missed the call). There can always be exceptions (i.e., the ball was loose and you didn't want to call a loose ball foul with bodies already everywhere on the floor.)

Are you serious?

Nothing personal, but that is absolutely and completely ridiculous. If a defender has a legal guarding position, then the position of his legs is legal too. If an opponent then goes over his legs, you <b>ONLY</b> have two possible calls-- a foul on the offensive player or no-call. You <b>CAN'T</b> call a block on a defender with LGP. EVER!!

Ridiculous advice.

And btw, it's exactly the same rule in NCAA and the pros too....the levels that you say you are doing.

So its not a foul if a defender has LGP and the offensive player makes a move to the hole and the defender re-routes the offensive player with a chest bump or body check? I guess not since he has LGP. And what about a forearm on the offensive player on the perimeter? He has LGP, so is everything he does legal within having LGP?

You really don't understand the concepts of legal guarding position, do you?:rolleyes:

We're talking about an offensive player going over the leg of a defender with LGP. We're <b>not</b> discussing the scenarios that you're trying to interject now.

You claimed that it is a foul on the defender <b>always</b> if the offensive player goes over the leg of a defender with LGP. Again, that is a ridiculous statement. If the defender has LGP, then the stance of his legs is also legal. That means that the one thing that you can't call, <b>by rule</b>, is a block. It's that simple.

All those things constitute illegal contact. Just like sticking a leg out as an offensive player goes by constitutes illegal contact.

But, where I disagree with your earlier post is that contact with the leg is always a blocking foul. If the defender established LGP, and doesn't move his/her leg into the way of the offensive player when the offensive player trips/bumps into that leg, then there's no way it's a defensive foul.

What if the defender is just standing there, the offensive player goes around, steps on the defender's foot and falls down. Are you calling that a block?

By rule, huh? You always get me there. SPIRIT AND INTENT, SPIRIT AND INTENT! Can't be said enough. By sticking their leg out they are hoping you are going to call that incidental contact, and that is exactly what you are doing. I am a firm believer that it is not the intent of the rule that the player should get away with something like that just because the exact wording of the rule protects them.

P.S. If you would kindly read the bottom of my first post in this thread, I would greatly and ALWAYS appreciate it. Thank you.

We've been told that most times on a block/charge scenario, when a player goes down, you should have a foul somewhere. The OP, however, I would say is the exception. I have to wonder, though, how it's happening so often in a game.
I think I know the answer. I played point guard in school, and I remember a game where I drew about 4 fouls by purposefully tripping over the defender's feet as we were running side by side. I kept doing it, because we kept gettin the call. My thoughts; if this is happening more than once in a game with the same offensive player, you need to consider that he might be doing it on purpose.

If a player sticks his leg out, he gives up LGP. You can all a block. If a player sticks his hips out, he waives (there you go, Juulie) his LGP, so you can call a block. In the OP, the player did not stick his legs out. He had his LGP established and moved his body away from the offensive player but did not move his legs. I've got a no call, and if everyone insists I call somthing, it's going to be PC.

Sigh.....

Again, you really don't understand the concept of legal guarding position. I don't care what you say about the spirit and intent of the rule. The bottom line is that the rule book says that you are completely and totally wrong. And I know that you keep saying that you are a college and pro official too, but if you ever tried to call that nonsense in one of those games, you'd never do another one.

First of all, where does the "exact wording of the rule" protect the defender, LGP or not, who "stick[s] their leg out"? It doesn't. That is a block, every time. That is different than the situation under discussion.

Second, I am a firm believer that a player whose play meets "the exact wording of the rule" is not "get[ting] away" with anything. He or she is playing perfectly legal basketball and no referee should apply personal interpretations, even under the guise of "SPIRIT AND INTENT," to invent fouls on perfectly legal plays.

I agree with this totally. If a kid seems like he his flopping to get this call, I will no call it and tell him to stop it and from then on the onus is on him. Good statement Snaqwells

Just to clarify to everyone, and so you will stop using and misleading everyone on the forum, I DO NOT WORK PRO BALL. I have worked it and plan on working it in the future, but am not working it at this very moment and if you will gladly point to me the post where I explicitly said that I will retract my statement right here and now.

Even if you don't do pro ball, some of your comments are dubious for a college or experienced high school official.

:confused: How can you possibly do this in a game?

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...194#post357194

Your quotes were:

- <i>"It is hard to keep up when you <b>ARE working three different rulesets</b>. I know in <b>the pros and college</b>....."</i>

- <i>"You are still allowed to work anything you want if you work in the WNBA and the NBA D-League. Don't forget about semi-pro and pro-ams in the summer as well. I have to keep up with these rulesets <b>as I work</b> and will be working with all of these rulesets. <b>I hope that one one day I will be able to narrow it down to two, and finally to one, but for now that is how it has to be</b>"</i>.

You stated that you <b>are</b> working three rulesets. I just want to clarify that if you are, then you are wrong in your interpretation of LGP and how to make a block/charge call in three different rulesets too.

It can, and has, been said enough. One must understand the literal meaning of a rule before one can begin to make legitimate exceptions to that literal meaning.

Routine applications of the "letter" of a rule can be made without appealing to the rule's spirit. The vast majority of cases fall within the scope of routine applications. Thus, it is wise to learn the rules.

Switch on every foul? If you're lead at one end, and call a foul, you'll end up as lead at the other end so you can call the same play the same way. Same with trail. It's not that difficult.

Call a block on a player with LGP. No way! no How.

If a players is playing good defense we should never penalize it, when the player is playing marginal defense then they get called for the foul. If this player does not move the feet, and had LGP (no extensions out side of the frame... etc) It is most likely nothing or PC...

Dood defense? Is that a new trend in hs ball? I thought was mainly in the bar leagues...:D

Oh, so when you officiate these plays happen back to back right after you switch? That must work out nice for you. I don't work games where the players are so kind as to have similar plays back to back so we can make the same call every time. Where does the calling official go when it is a three man game? Are you sure it isn't that difficult? Think about it and tell me again how you can make sure the same official is at lead for these calls.

I don't work any 3-whistle, so I can't answer that part. No it doesn't always work out nicely like that, but sometimes it does. It's not a panacea to totally even out the calling. It's just one more possible way to reduce the number of problems that we can create for ourselves. Sometimes my partner and I can agree, sometimes the same person can be in place to call the same thing at both ends.

Occasionally, we have a problem when each partner refuses to adjust their calls. When that happens, and I think that's what the question in the oP was about, I try to adjust a little, and I try to make it so that one of us is getting the same calls at both ends. It's not the final answer, but it's one more tool.

The tone of your responses seems a little snippy. What's the issue?

That is part of the problem with typing instead of talking, I thought your previous post was a little snippy. To say it isn't that difficult isn't really accurate when you have to follow it up with many "ifs." In fact, it wouldn't be that difficult if these plays happened back to back and we all worked two man. Since we know, and knew when you made your original post, that it isn't that cut and dry, your reply was a little snippy. As always, please don't mistake my responses as snippy. I'm sorry, but I can be intense about things.

Okay, I see your point. If I remember correctly, you and I have had this problem before.

You know I also think that you do a lot higher level of ball that Rita and I are talking about. in JH, and Frsh and JV it often happens that the same thing will happen at both ends over and over. Less true in varsity, probably even less in college.

And that reminds me of another little coping mechanism to deal with it when P and I aren't on the same page. If a coach complains, "Call it both ways!", I have said a few times, "Coach those two plays were clearly not the same situation." That can be sort of true on almost any two situations, but you can't say it too often.

Could you please find another word to use instead of <b>that</b> one?

Shudder.......:eek:

In response to the first quote, I was just saying that it IS hard when you are working 3 different rulesets. There has been times where I went from HS rules to ncaa, to pros within a weeks time frame.

In response to the 2nd, I should have stated it better. It should have said, "as I have worked and will be working with all of these rulesets".

In response to the 3rd. I was talking in future tense, meaning that at one point in time I will hopefully be working all 3 levels and have to juggle the 3, and narrow it down to 2, and then to 1.

I think I understand LGP just fine, but we will just have to agree to disagree.

Sorry for the previous misunderstanding.

Is btaylor and tenesseeref the same person?

What level NCAA games are you working or did work? D1? D2? D3? NAIA? JC?

What pro leagues do you work or did work? WNBA? NBDL? CBA? ABA? Other?

Just wondering......

You mean is he working in the.....wait for it.....SEC?:D

Rainmaker, I understand what you are saying. Also, I don't think it is ever too soon - or the level too low - to start doing and thinking about things the right way.
I often notice that the best officiated high school games occur when one or more of the officials is vilified for doing something that is right but not popular. Many officials don't want to do things that aren't popular and/or don't have the intestinal fortitude (JR) to make correct calls. IMO this is one cause for inconsistency in the high school game.
I did (or didn't depending on how you look at it) something last night that was correct, but didn't make a coach happy. I T'd the coach up after another play although he was upset about the original situation. One of my partners did something later that was blatantly inconsistent and the coach got upset and rightfully so. I apologized to the coach later for our inconsistency; he still earned the T and wasn't right in the first place. A little awareness from my partner would have resulted in a more consistent game. Not related to the OP, but oh well!

Wait for it...yes!

Funny how one SEC can affect another SEC! Some people won't get that and I know it was a low blow, but whatever. :D

Or a no call followed closely by a travel.

In btaylor's defense (not that he needs me from it), it's entirely possible to use the pro ruleset without being anywhere near an actual pro league. Around here (and in many parts of the country, from what I'm told), there is a "pro-am" league which is basically an men's adult league that has former small-time D1 players in it. They use the NBA rules and mechanics, but no way is it a "pro" league.

Um, yeah, I was certainly aware of that. Usually when someone says that they are working pro leagues though , they are are talking about the players being paid for playing in games where admission is being charged. Personally, I don't count rec leagues as being related to pro ball in any way, shape or form. That includes the Jr. NBA leagues too. Rec leagues are rec leagues. That certainly is not a put-down of rec leagues and the officials that work in them either. We service rec leagues of different calibres in our area too. I also know that some rec leagues use NCAA rules too. That doesn't make them college games.

I just got the impression from Mr. Taylor that he was experienced and actually working in real college and pro games. He did state that he has worked pro and college ball.

Yeah, but originally, I thought he just said he used pro rules. My bad.