How patient is too patient?
 

I had a situation and am still struggling with how I handled it. I'm lead. Pass comes into low post to A1, who has his back to the basket. Defender B1 jumps and bumps A1, who is not really trying for the basket yet. I hold my whistle...A1 does a good job gathering himself, turns to go to the basket.....and travels.

Coach of A as I'm going back up the court asks "Didn't you see him get bumped?" I said "Coach, I was trying to let him play through it, and score a basket." Coach wasn't tickled, but I guess he accepted the answer.

The bump DID NOT cause the travel.

I need some guidance!!!!

Good call. The bump didn't cause the travel. Tell the coach the bump was a little accidental contact and move on.

I'll jump in on this one. I believe basketball is not a non-contact sport. With that being said unless B1 gained an advantage (i.e. he displaced A1, he interfered with A1 being able to make a move or impeded him) I let my guys play. If we call every touch there would not be enough hours in the day to play a ball game. That being said it is a judgement call and you have to decide the level of contact you allow. The coaches and playeres will adjust if you are consistant.

Sounds fine to me Frank. If the bump ahppened while A1 had both feet on the floor, and then he started moving after that, it's hard to imagine that the bump caused it! And actually, I like your answer to the coach, too. It's not argumentative, and it shows that you're trying to "let the kids play" which is what most coaches will say they want at that level.

Actually, I would be a little less cavalier in my wording. More along the lines that the bump was incidental contact because no displacement occurred and no advantage was gained. Saying you want him to play through it puts too much onus on you and less on the rules.

Good post, I agree but I'm just throwing a little nugget out I heard not long ago. A college assignor I hope to work for soon recently told me that basketball is a contact sport, not a collision sport. I thought that was kind of a nice, simplified way to look at it.

Basketball is not a non-conctact sport. Junker's quote from the assignor is right on. We allow contact all the time, and it's perfectly legal (boxing out for example).

I'm with Ignats75 on this one. If you felt the bump was not worthy of a whistle, that's fine, but don't tell the coach you were letting the player "play through it". Phrasing it the way you did is basically telling the coach that it was a foul but you chose not to call it.

In this case, the fewer words, the better. Personally, I probably would have said something along the lines of "I might have missed that one Coach". That way you're not admitting anything but it gives the coach the satisfaction of being heard and acknowleged.

Did A1 have to gather himself because of the bump or as the act of jumping and catching the pass? (I deduced that he jumped since B1 jumped.)

However, if as you state , A1 was fully able to gether himself, it reads as if the travel and potentially missed call had nothing to do with each other.

If you <b>think</b> that you should have called it, you should have called it.

I disagree with this. We might think that way because of dumb coaches that want every little contact call and in the back of our mind do not want to take heat for a call. If you are confident in your ability and your experience, when you question those times you feel things should have been called, you realize why you made the call you did. I would not say just because there is a little doubts that you were wrong. You might ask your partner(s) what they saw and they might confirm you should not have called anything.

Peace

Or you could have let them both go, since you didn't call the bump, we're even now!

Play on!

OS I know you are joking but someone else may be confused. You can not justify letting the travel go to "make up" for a no call or even a call you know you missed. You have to call each call seperate from the other. So just putting it out there that I know you're kidding.......right?

I have to disagree with you here. If there are similar plays or cause as a result of a single incident, to pass on both is not about making anything up. You are using judgment not call two minor infractions. No different than if you have two players doing something to each other (hand check and ball handler using the arm for space at the same time) that could be illegal alone, but we pass on because there is little or not advantage. I do not agree with Old School very often if at all, but I definitely agree with this statement. It also not very realistic to take every single call separate as if nothing else factors into our consideration. I am not going to make a call late in the game I have not made early in the game that is minor in nature.

Peace

OK J.R., how do you explain to a coach when he says the man traveled? Are you going to say you let that go since you didn't call the previous travel at the other end?

If you read the OP, the topic starter said there was no travel in his judgment. Secondly, just because a coach thinks there is a travel, does not make it so. I also do not make a habit of explain travels to coaches. So you seem more concerned about what you have to say to a coach than what might be considered consistent throughout the game or calling something that is a minor infraction. Of course that is your right, but that does not mean I have to agree with it.

Peace

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(From original post)
I had a situation and am still struggling with how I handled it. I'm lead. Pass comes into low post to A1, who has his back to the basket. Defender B1 jumps and bumps A1, who is not really trying for the basket yet. I hold my whistle...A1 does a good job gathering himself, turns to go to the basket.....and travels

I don't care how a coach, fan, or player feels about me. I care about the game. I give each team a far and impartial chance at winning within the rules of the game. If you feel you need to classify infractions as minor and decide whice infractions to call and which not to so much , it sounds to me like you are helping to decide the outcome of the game. Just an observation, nothing personal

Bob Herrold said it best.. "Basketball is a non-contact sport with contact!" Therefore, advantage and disadvantage; letting them play; sucking on the whistle to see the whole play --> are what each official are trying to strive for. But if the player would have scored and not traveled, the coach would have not said much. Maybe he would have wanted a three point play then. So long as you stayed consistent with the rest of the game and your partners, you seem to have done the right thing.

But he did travel so what should have been done?

Call the travel. Every little bump and touch is not a foul. If we called every little bump and touch, not much of a game. One thing I know is that the players and "good" coaches know.

I had a game where B1 stoled the ball at midcourt from A1. There was a bumb, I sucked on my whistle. B1 gathered himself and A1 just stood there after the bump. B1 had an uncontested layup for 2 points. Team B's coach looked at me and said "You let the bump go so that we could have the lay up, right?" I said "Yes". He said "Good job, to many officials call it without watching the whole play develop."

I agree with your situation but when the OP didn't call the travel because of not calling the bump it was not the right thing to do. I would not have called the bump but the travel I would call.

I am glad you care about the game, I care about the game and being consistent and I do not take every single call without consideration of other calls or how the result of something else might have affected the entire play. And if the OP said there was no travel, I am not going to call one with minor contact. It is also called judgment and your judgment might not match mine (which is fine with me). So if you feel you need to call everything that do that. I will call the game that has worked well for me over the years. It has worked out for me quite well.

Peace

JR if you read the original post you will see he said the kid traveled and I say if the kid traveled after the bump not because of the bump and after he gathered himself then I call it. I am reading that the bump was past and the kid gathered himself so now we are ok. Then he traveled. Is this what you read? If so why not call it? If not please explain.

Basketball fundamentals say "contact is not always a foul".

Sadly, he ain't kidding at all.

The OP said that there <b>WAS</b> a travel. A "no doubt about it" travel! Are you really saying that we should ignore <b>OBVIOUS</b> travels?:rolleyes:

Look, if it was stated that the travel was a completely separate event from the bump, then they have to be treated as two separate events. If the bump was over and done, and you judged it a no call to play on, great. Forget it, it's done. It should NOT have any bearing on whether you call a travel for A1's next move. If you would have called A1's move a travel 5 minutes ago, it's a travel now. You said yourself it wasn't caused by the contact. Anyone who says ignore the travel because you ignored the contact is encouraging you to be an inconsistent official. That just doesn't make sense. And you don't owe the coach an explanation for every single call or no call in the game. I may have just told him, "No advantage!"

Ok...I'm sorry it wasn't clear....I DID call a travel. At that point, in my opinion, the bump and the travel were two different episodes. That is why the coach asked me if I saw the bump. Yes, I did, but the player didn't, in my opinion, at the time, lose any advantage. He was able to settle, then made a turn to the basket. Then he travelled.

I would have hated to stop the play for contact, when the player had a good opportunity to put the ball in the basket from the low post.

I guess my concern was how do I legitimize to the coach that I passed on the contact, because I thought he did have a good opportunity to score.

You don't have to legitimize to the coach. Keep your responses short and non-confrontational then keep moving:

"Contact was incidental"

"I may have missed something"

"There was no foul there"

Frank, with all due respect, you started three threads in the past three years about having a patient whistle. Is it consuming you? :)

Honestly, it sounds to me like you're calling your game and you're calling it consistently. Stop worrying about what the coaches are saying. They're going to gripe either way. Continue as you have been, applying advantage/disadvantage and I believe you'll be fine!

Rainmaker...where are you?? I thought you were designated Mrs. Annoying Grammar Girl for today?:)

No, I said I'm NOT Ms. Annoying Grammar Gal. I just chime in and get annoying occasionally when I'm in a bad mood or something strikes me funny. Sorry to disappoint you. And by the way, I'm way too big and too old to be a "girl." If I'm acting immature enough that you don't feel comfortable calling me a woman, then "gal" is fine.

A thousand pardons Ma'am.
I shall now flagellate myself with a wet noodle!:(

Dude, can we say that in a public forum. FCC?

Dude, it's all good. (Did I really say dude?)

American Heritage Dictionary
flag·el·late (flāj'ə-lāt') Pronunciation Key
tr.v. flag·el·lat·ed, flag·el·lat·ing, flag·el·lates

1. To whip or flog; scourge.
2. To punish or impel as if by whipping.

I'm not familiar with Bob Herrold, but his statement is nonsensical. It's like talking about unleaded gasoline with lead in it. Or sugar-free gum with sugar in it. Not only did he NOT say it best, what he did say is meaningless.

And even if I fully understood what Bob Herrold was saying (and I honestly don't), the rulebook specifically defines the contact that is inherent in the game ("incidental contact"). It is a contact sport. That doesn't make it football, but it's not golf either.

Well said. Ignore the coaches unless they are asking a question.

This is the best way to describe basketball. How can anyone truly say basketball is not a contact sport?