There's a <b>tiny</b> guy officiating up in <b>your</b> neighbourhood too. About 6'14" and 525#. Wears a tutu when he officiates. You ever meet Larks?:D

Seriously - If you are refereeing by the advantage/disadvantage method almost all of us claim to prescribe to - the ball went out of bounds so there is an advantage/disadvantage situation - so you have to call the foul our give the ball to the team truly entitiled to it or you are not using advantage/disadvantage as we are taught. :confused:

To me that means the team that didn't touch it last. Do you mean something else by that statement? :confused:

I mean that if red touched it last and it went OOB then white gets the ball - do not give it back to red because he went OOB because of contact that wasn't enough for you to call - that is a contradiction of what you just had happen in froont of you.

See the discussion of "saving a foul" in the other posts in this thread. I'm not advocating this, just acknowledging that it exists.

I've read them, I just don't agree with them. If it's not enough to call the foul, then I'm not going to distort the rules (like giving an OOB ball back to the team that's not entitled). Your post also mentioned deliberately passing off a foul onto someone else instead of the star player. I'm not even going there.

Minor contact on a passer that would kill a fast break and take away the significant advantage of the offense? Yeah, that I would probably let go. Even by rule you're allowed to disregard an obvious non-contact violation of the defense that is committed solely to take away the other team's obvious advantage, ie: a defender purposely leaving the court to kill the play.
Although this sitch entails minor contact, I probably wouldn't call it if I don't think it puts the offending player at a disadvantage.

1)To me advantage/disadvantage does apply when you give the ball to a team out of bounds when bumped slightly.

2)Team throws ball in, player lifts foot up slightly before putting ball down to dribble in own backcourt with no press and no defensive player in sight. If you call a travel there, you are just bogging down the game on a useless call.

3)Player receives an inbounds pass, defense very lightly bumps into him not affecting the player at all. I would rather pass on the slight foul and allow the offensive player to work inside since he has the ball where he wanted the ball in the first place.

1) To me, you're completely wrong and you're also making up your own rules. May I suggest that you read POE 5A on p69 of this year's NFHS rule book. The FED rulesmakers put this POE in with officials like you in mind.

2) Interesting. Do you also advocate also not calling a dribbler OOB if he steps on a sideline with no pressure too? That's another useless call, isn't it? Isn't that exactly the same type of situation----> a violation with no one around? Or if you disagree, does that mean that you advocate picking and choosing what violations you might feel like calling at any particular time during a game?

3) I would certainly hope that you would pass on that contact and not call it a foul. Contact that doesn't affect a player isn't a foul. Says so right in NFHS rule 4-27-3--<i>"Similarly, contact which does not hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered <b>incidental</b>".</i>

I guess I'm not half as good a referee as I thought I was!

Maybe I need to go back to the YMCA games!

I just like to try and get a flow going to a game. I don't like to be over-officious which to me is completely going by the book every time, all the time. I cannot call a foul on a passer when I can tell the pass is going to a wide open teammate for a layup (even though technically it is a foul). If a player barely touches the line throwing the ball in after an opponent's basket with no backcourt pressure.....it isn't that big a deal to ignore it (if he steps on it or in the court..call it...use common sense). stuff like that. Am I that wrong in thinking that way? No one that assigns my games have ever had a problem with the way I officiate....always get a high ranking....so I must be doing something right. Maybe I just don't translate on the computer well......

I stick to the rules. I enforce the game. I manage the game. I keep it fair,.. try not to let anyone get hurt. Not every foul is a foul in my opinion and different games call for different styles of officiating. Some players can bang a little, some can't. Advantage/disadvantage is important isn't it?

1) Ah, yes. The "game interrupter" excuse. Very, very familiar tactic. Ignoring a foul and making a call that has absolutely <b>no</b> rules basis to justify it is keeping the game flowing. Sorry, somehow I can't agree with that. If you stop the flow to call whatever you're calling to give the ball back to the dribbler, then you're also stopping the flow from flowing if you make the <b>right</b> call-->a foul. Btw, exactly <b>what</b> are you calling to give the ball back to the dribbler? It isn't a violation. It isn't a foul. It isn't defined anywhere in any rule book that I know of. What the heck is it?

2) Yup, I'd ignore a thrower touching the line too. It isn't a violation and it never has been a violation. As for calling a violation on a thrower stepping <b>on</b> the court, I agree with you that it should be called. I just want an explanation from you why you would call that violation but you would ignore a dribbler violating by stepping out of bounds after being bumped. What criteria do you use to pick and choose what violations should be called and which ones should be ignored?

3) It's <b>always</b> a great idea to stick to the rules. I agree with that statement completely. However...what rule are you sticking to that lets you give the ball back to the dribbler on a force-out?

4) Yes, advantage/disadvantage is important. It also has got absolutely nothing to do with an official who decides he's going to ignore the rule book and make up his own rules.

I am hanging myself out on this one but I did this the other night in a boys varsity game. I was lead. A1 dribbled down the lane and was blocked by B1. I ignored the contact (why, I really have NO idea). Anyway, the ball flies out of A1's hand and out of bounds. I called "A". I will admit that I though ahead about it. There were many players in the key so I knew I had the best view of it. We were right in front of A's bench so I knew Coach B could not really say anything and, if he did, I could explain it since I had a better angle. I know this is not right but A1 was clearly blocked and I clearly missed it so I clearly blew two in a row and gave the ball back to A. The last thing about it was A was down by about 20 at the time. I am not sure if I would do this in a close game and hopefully I will get the block right next time. In the end, no one said anything, we played on, and I am not sure if anyone really caught it except for me. I was evaluated that night and my evaluator didn't even mention it in the write up. Not that that matters or changes it but that's what I did, right or wrong (probably wrong).

As far as this post goes, does anyone know how many fouls the defensive player had on him? I am not a D1 official but I have been told that at that level these folks are very in tune with things like that. I agree with Mick that he probably called the OOB to ignore the foul, especially if the defensive player had 3 or 4 fouls. Just curious.

This happens all the time, at all levels of basketball.

When we determine that contact is onot a foul it is done because there was no advantage gained or it did not disrupt the action on the floor.
If the contact cuases the player to go down or lose control of the ball then there is advantage gained because another violation or turnover has occured that could result in the lose of the ball for that team.
Example - the dreaded player contact/or tangling of feet that results in the dribbler staggering down the floor for a couple of seconds but then goes down as a result of that contact and you end up making the call two or three seconds after the contact. Do you let that player go down and just give them back the ball?
What was different in this situation as described. If the contact cuased the ball to go out of bounds and as a result of that contact advantage is gained (they get the ball) you have to call the foul, I see no other choice.

Ah, that's easy !
The difference is that it is easier to hide an out-of-bounds call cuz the line is so close. :)

Dave30,

Jurassic doesn't understand what common sense officiating is, he backs every TINY thing he does and says by the rulebook and thinks it is ok and in fact it is, he can never be told he is completely and utterly wrong (like he does to those common sense officials on the forum day in and day out) if he uses the rulebook for everything.

Here is a good story in which I did the right thing by rule but didn't employ common sense officiating like I should have and screwed a team over or so I thought and my crew thought and my supervisor thought.

It is a 2 point ball game with team B down and Team A throwing the ball in having to go the length of the floor with about 7.2 left in the game. As Team A is trying to inbound I am at C opposite in a pressing situation by Team B. A3 being guarded by B3 near the division line runs backward like he is going for the long pass and then starts to run up toward the ball, B3 grabs him and I call an INTENTIONAL FOUL. By rule I am correct in doing so because it was a foul that kept the clock from running, but it was wrong in common sense officiating. The kid didn't hug him because they knew he was the worse free throw shooter or foul him maliciously. My supervisor even got onto me after the game and as soon as he did or even before he did I knew I had screwed up.

Dave30 I understand exactly what you are trying to say and agree with you but if you don't go by the rule book on this forum, you will inevitably get eaten up by the shark(s).

P.S. If a kid loses the ball because of a bump and it goes off of that kid I have a foul, regardless of how slight. I'm not sacrificing a missed OOB call to "save a foul", but on that note never say never. I'm sure there will be a time or have been times where I didn't think the bump was sufficient enough for him to lose control or I just know from watching that the kid was a bad dribbler and shouldn't have been dribbling in the first place.