How patient is too patient?

[FrankHtown]

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!!!!

[Junker]

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

[armymanjones]

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.

[rainmaker]

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.

[Ignats75]

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.

[Junker]

Originally Posted by armymanjones

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.

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.

[Adam]

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).

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by FrankHTown

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.

Originally Posted by Ignats75

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.

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.

[SamIAm]

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.

[Jurassic Referee]

If you think that you should have called it, you should have called it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If you think 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

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If you think that you should have called it, you should have called it.

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

Play on!

[armymanjones]

Originally Posted by Old School

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?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by armymanjones

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

[armymanjones]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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?