Over-rule your partner?

[illinoisbluezeb]

Originally Posted by SWMOzebra

Virtually same call happened to me over the weekend. I was T on a 2-man team with A1 bringing ball up the court. She crosses into FC and gets trapped, throws the ball back to A2 who is still in BC. A2 jumps (both feet off the floor when contact with the ball was made) and lands in FC squarely with ball in hand. The L whistles for a BC violation...we conference and agree to disagree, but he does acknowledge it was not his call and defers to me. I say inadvertent whistle and we play on with A getting the ball.

The nice part here was no argument from either bench...in fact, it may have been the only no argument whistle all night.

Question: When She crosses into FC, areboth feet and the ball now in FC?

IF no, then no call or IAW is correct.

If yes, then when she throws the ball back to A2 who is still in BC. A2 jumps (both feet off the floor when contact with the ball was made) and lands in FC, this is is a BC violation. A2 did not have FC status until she lands, when she touched the ball she had BC status causing the BC violation.

You are where your are until you get where you are going. Rule-4 Section-35 Article-3

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by illinoisbluezeb

Question: When She crosses into FC, areboth feet and the ball now in FC?

If the dribbler crossed into the frontcourt, she must have had both feet and the ball in the frontcourt, by rule. If she didn't, she wouldn't have crossed into the frontcourt. She'd still be in the backcourt, also by rule. It's that simple.

Originally Posted by refnjoe

Can you tell me the rule/case reference for this, please?

Thanks!

NFHS 4-35-3

[Adam]

Originally Posted by illinoisbluezeb

Question: When She crosses into FC, areboth feet and the ball now in FC?

IF no, then no call or IAW is correct.

This is true for a dribbler only. If she's not dribbling; she's got FC status as soon as she's holding the ball with at least one foot in the FC and no part of her touching the BC.

[deecee]

on the part about partners calling out of primary and court coverage snafus after we pre-game who covers what in the gray zone and what happens on contact in the gray zone I still get a lot of guys calling through the lane and fouls that occur after the play has turned away from them and they get straight lined when their partner is the only one with a clear look at any contact.

When I mention any of this I can tell that most of them dont give a rats azz to listen to me because most of the time I am at least 10-15 years their junior. It takes a lot for me to get frustrated and one thing that gets me is erors that happen after we plan on what to do in those exact situation and then after the first screw up and I go over with them "Hey partner please hold your whistle for a second on those calls through the lane -- and unless you have a felony trust me to make that call" what do I get -- more calls through the lane -- and most of the time they are on plays that has the ball handler going away from the basket or towards the endline not the paint.

[btaylor64]

Man it is crazy to see how much regular season ball is being called with 2-man crews. I could never imagine doing a 2-man game in regular season basketball although the money would be nicer.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Man it is crazy to see how much regular season ball is being called with 2-man crews. I could never imagine doing a 2-man game in regular season basketball although the money would be nicer.

It's not like we're given a choice. Oregon isn't even considering 3-man from what I've heard. I don't know if it's a cost issue, but if it is I can understand it. The public school system has plenty of money issues already - spending it on 3-man officiating crews is pretty silly when they can't even buy enough textbooks.

[deecee]

southern california (at least south orange county is)is proposing 3 man for all league varisty contests starting next year. And highly reccommending 3man for all varsity contests not just league games.

Pay difference between 3 and 2 man isnt that huge but if anyone here is doing HS ball for the money I would suggest a good exit strategy.

[JRutledge]

The only reason I officiate might not have anything to do with the money, but I am not doing it for free either. Those checks add up and that money can and will be used for things I would like to use it for.

Peace

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by deecee

When I mention any of this I can tell that most of them dont give a rats azz to listen to me because most of the time I am at least 10-15 years their junior. It takes a lot for me to get frustrated and one thing that gets me is erors that happen after we plan on what to do in those exact situation and then after the first screw up and I go over with them "Hey partner please hold your whistle for a second on those calls through the lane -- and unless you have a felony trust me to make that call" what do I get -- more calls through the lane -- and most of the time they are on plays that has the ball handler going away from the basket or towards the endline not the paint.

I would keep talking to them. If it isn't a foul I would certainly tell them and when they act like they don't care I would add the fact that they couldn't see the play and it wasn't a foul. If it is a foul I would come with a late whistle and not even look at them on the way to the table. I would tell them later that I didn't look at them because it wasn't their call and they shouldn't have had a whistle anyway. This doesn't happen a lot because most officials want to do the right thing the right way, but when it does I would deal with it.

[blindzebra]

Originally Posted by refnjoe

Can you tell me the rule/case reference for this, please?

Thanks!

4-35-3

You are where you are at until you get where you are going.

[JRutledge]

Honestly I do not know what I would do. I would hope that I would change the call or go to my partner, but that is only if the partner has a good understanding of how things work (which is not displayed by this type of call). I do know I would not argue about the call on the court, but I just might have a serious discussion in the locker room at halftime or after the game.

Peace

[lukealex]

Originally Posted by blindzebra

4-35-3

You are where you are at until you get where you are going.

I like "You are where you WERE until you get where you're going"

You are in the air, but you were in the backcourt

[Old School]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

So what do you do? Get together with him and let him know one foot never left the backcourt? Do nothing and talk to him after the game?

The art of diplomacy. I would right then and there asked him what he saw, like another poster suggested. Then I would tell him very politely we both don't need to watch the ball at the same time. If I'm watching the ball up here, you need to be watching the other players down there. You're working way too hard trying to call both. Another catch phrase I'm using more and more, is; "let me live with my calls or no-calls".

We have all had to work with people like this. You have to try to give them some feedback that it's wrong, but you absolutely don't want to come off too abrasive as this could cause a backfire effect. Last, remember these people and don't take anymore assignments with them. I have to know who my partners are before I take a game because of situations exactly like this.

Peace

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Smitty

It's not like we're given a choice. Oregon isn't even considering 3-man from what I've heard. I don't know if it's a cost issue, but if it is I can understand it. The public school system has plenty of money issues already - spending it on 3-man officiating crews is pretty silly when they can't even buy enough textbooks.

In most gyms I've been in, admissions and snack sales make it a zero sum game. The extra official is covered by those revenue sources, not a bigger slice out of the budget.