[QUOTE=Snaqwells]
Okay, you go ref a 5th grade boys game and call every travel and double dribble you see. Work on picking up the pivot foot.
QUOTE]

How do they learn what they're doing wrong if they don't get called for it? I don't have any problem calling these kinds of things - and many coaches have actually complimented me on it because they are trying to teach their kids the right way to do things. The refs who ignore things like that teach the kids bad habits.

And yes, some coaches complain that i'm not letting them play. I always say "My job is to keep the kids safe, and administer the rules - if the kids play safe (for their level), and they play within the rules, they get plenty of game flow - if they don't, the game flow isn't there because of their style of play"

I don't think you are really asking anything. You are getting some really solid answers and keep disagreeing. I think you are trying to make a point and are posing it as a question. You want every foul called by the book. Go ahead and ref that way if you really feel that is the way it should be done. I wouldn't do it that way.

Then explain to me why you have rule makers or POE's saying "Call this, every time" - and interpreters and assignors saying "Don't call this" or "Call it this way (in a way which contradicts the way the rule maker or POE says), and it's wrong or looked down upon to do what the rules say, but not what the assignors or interpreters say?

(and don't just come back with "Do whatever you want - you will anyway", or anything like that. I'm looking for a reason why we feel that this is appropriate to have this contradition occur - rule says one thing, assignor/interpreter says another - shouldn't we be consistent?)

So you're just going to call what you want to call, regardless of the rules? Isn't this kind of against the point of having rules?

Two things, and they may seem contradictory.
1. At certain lower levels, if you call them for every violation you see, they won't learn anything. You call 40 travels in a running clock game, all they're going to learn is how to run their in bounds play. I'll tell you flat out, when I'm doing a game like this, I'm looking for advantage on a travel before I call it; same thing with double dribbles.
2. It's not our job to teach these kids to play basketball. In a way, it's to allow the coaches to teach them. By blowing your whistle every 20 seconds, we remove that opportunity from the coaches.
3. I don't care about how many coaches compliment or complain. (I know I said two, but consider 3 a bonus.) :)

You're ignoring 4-27-3 in spite of its clarity on this exact point.

And coaches have complimented me. I don't teach the kids anything. The coaches do. It's the coach's job to teach the kids not to travel.

If I'm doing a 10U game I'm not calling every single travel. If a player is all by his/herself near halfcourt and lifts the pivot foot before dribbling I'm not calling it. And I'll continue to get games.

Apparent
 

I feel that drinkeii just wants to start an argument. He doesn't want to listen to our answers. I say just give him more rope.... you guys know what will happen.

Good point on #3 - i'm simply saying I have some coaches that agree with my philosophy.

As for 1 and 2 - they're not going to learn the rules (which is bad enough as it is - no one seems to know the real rules except for the refs, which is a major part of problems with basketball and rule enforcement - players would play better if they knew what was really legal and not, rather than wanting reaching and over the back fouls), if they're just allowed to do whatever they want to. I've seen 5th grade games which every kid travels every time he moves, and I've seen 5th grade games where every kid is able to recognise his pivot, set it, and move legally. Most are somewhere in between. If our job isn't to teach, then we should be calling it every time, and every coach should be explaining to their kids what they're doing wrong. In a perfect world...

And now you are putting words in my mouth. I am not going to become overly officious. There is no point to be a legalist. Every judicial system has a place for grace, mercy, and common sense. If a guy is coming up in the backcourt all by himself and palms the ball...I am not going to call it. If the same guy then fakes to the right on his defender and then palms the ball to bring it back across his defender to gain an advantage, then I will call it.

However, if you want every law enforced just as it is written, that is your right. Just don't complain if you ever get a ticket for going 31 in a 30 mph zone.

Not "Apparent"
 

I'm looking for an explanation, other than the excuses I listed in an earlier post. I'm not looking to argue. The answers have all said "We're going to do what we want" or some variation on this, in complete disregard for what the rules actually say. Explain to me what justifies your decision to not call things because you "don't want to" or "don't feel its justified", even though the rules say you should. Because it makes a good game? Not part of my job. Because I feel that's what is best? Why have rules, if I get to make them up as I go? Because the coaches/parents/players want/don't want it called? Not my consideration - My job is keep the kids safe and administer the rules.

Isn't that all our job?

You picked the wrong person for that - I would not complain. I broke the law, and have no problem with accepting the consequences of that choice. But what about a sports example - they only stepped a little on the out of bounds line, not a lot. Millimeter? Half inch? Where do we draw the line? If they step on the line, they're out of bounds. If they break the rules, they broke the rules. I don't remember grace, mercy, or common sense being referred to in the rules. Otherwise - well, it was a beautiful play, but you traveled - guess I'll ignore the travel in favor of the beautiful play. Find support for that in the rules...

The biggest problem with kids (in or out of sports) - they're unwilling to accept consequences for their actions. Correction - they're willing to accept positive consequences for their choices which generate them - but not negative ones. It's always someone else's fault. But again, another topic.

If you're talking about the topic of this thread, then this is wrong. Again, see rule 4-27-3.
If you're talking about traveling in a 5th grade girls game.... good grief.

David, you're on another one of these crusades that you started back in November. ( http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=29320 ) We're not calling what we want, regardless of the rules. We're trying to judge whether the contact gives either player an advantage that is unintended by the rules, which is what the rules tell us to do.

Not all contact is a foul. Not even all significant contact is a foul. You don't seem to like that reality. That's what the rules tell us. That is the rule. Maybe your idea of an advantage is significantly different from others on this forum. That's possible. But what's not possible is to try to carry the philosophy "A foul is a foul is a foul" onto the court. Because in real life, that just ain't so.

A foul in a 4th grade game may be incidental contact in a high school game. Incidental contact on the big man in the post may be a foul when it happens to the shooting guard.

You seem to want a one-size-fits-all, black-and-white philosophy; and there just isn't one. You have to judge each contact situation on its own.

You're half right. Our job is to administer the rules. Keeping them safe is a product of that, but it is not an actual consideration.