The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Carrying a weak partner (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/35532-carrying-weak-partner.html)

Back In The Saddle Sun Jun 10, 2007 01:44am
Carrying a weak partner
 
I attended a church-sponsored officiating camp this week to help out with training church league referees. The mix of experience and abilities was very wide ranging. Some folks we encouraged to sign up for high school ball this year. Others...well I shudder at the mere thought of them stepping on any court anywhere. And I got to work with some of both.

As I have moved up the ranks, I find more often than not that I'm paired with weaker partners. So I have had ample opportunity to work on my "lead official" skills and learn to carry a weaker partner. Generally it goes pretty well. But this weekend was a very mixed bag. Frankly I was surprised at how badly a couple of my games went. Apparently I don't have all the tools in my bag that I need.

Which has me thinking: What do you think it takes to successfully carry a significantly weaker partner, especially in an ugly game?

Mark Padgett Sun Jun 10, 2007 04:27pm
I'm sure you realize there's no stock answer to your question. Some "weaker" partners can be very resentful of anything you try to do to help. Conversely, some are grateful for any help. I guess you just try to test them out at the beginning of the game the first time they don't perform up to par by diplomatically asking them about a call. Try not to "lecture" them, but try to phrase your help in the form of questions without being confrontational. Nod and say things like "I see" when they answer. Reply with suggestions in a friendly manner. Unless they're a real jerk (which, unfortunately, sometimes is the case) they probably will become more responsive as the game goes on. You know you've gotten through to them when they start to come to you for advice, however, if they tell you they don't want any, just accept that and do the best you can on your own.

Hope that helps at least a little. Just be patient and accept that you can't turn everyone around.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Sun Jun 10, 2007 08:56pm
Just ask Daryl Long how he handles having to carry a weak partner for game after game, year after year. :D

MTD, Sr.

JRutledge Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:13pm
Mark,

I think that was one of the best answers I have ever heard from you. No sarcasm and just plain dope about the topic. I am impressed my man, very impressed. :D

BITS,

Mark gave the best answer by far (I would not do any justice to add anything).

Peace

jeffpea Sun Jun 10, 2007 10:54pm
usually a weaker partner is just trying to "survive" the game by trying to get the calls right. he/she can't focus on all the "other stuff" (i.e. game management). that's where you have to step in and handle most, if not all, of those duties. take the pressure off of him or her by talking to/dealing with players, coaches, problem situations, etc. they are too busy officiating to notice lopsided foul counts, players who are becoming a problem, and controlling the benches.

you can't make every call for them (although you may have to "reach" a little now and then).

Dan_ref Sun Jun 10, 2007 11:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Which has me thinking: What do you think it takes to successfully carry a significantly weaker partner, especially in an ugly game?
Whatever you do, don't govonging.

That would be bad.

Jurassic Referee Sun Jun 10, 2007 11:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_ref
Whatever you do, don't govonging.

That would be bad.
Especially if your neighbors found out.......:eek:

OHBBREF Mon Jun 11, 2007 08:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle
Apparently I don't have all the tools in my bag that I need.
Which has me thinking: What do you think it takes to successfully carry a significantly weaker partner, especially in an ugly game?
You can only do what you can do; offer help as far as coverage; philosophy; and management during a pre-game or at dead ball periods of the game.
Pretty early on you should find out if there is something to work with or if you just are going to tough it out. Then the best you can do is find some middle ground of trying to not let the game get out of hand and completely taking over the game. When it is ugly well it is ugly and all you can do is manage it.

Having been through a couple of camps already I have seen this several times this summer. I try to offer the "R" mentality with my partners and maintain both my composure and my primaries. I protect my partners integrity and use my communication and managment skills to try not to let it get out of hand.

In one particularly ugly contentset when it was clear that one of my partners where out of his league our observer told me afterward that he gave up on that ref and was watching what the other two did to manage the game with this weak partner. While we did have to whack both a player and a coach because of this guys calls we were able to cover a lot of what he did through managment and talking with both players and coaches.
Because of those "T's" almost all of the reaming when his way at the end of the game.
I think the only thing you can do is work on your managment skills in these sithuations.

Mark Padgett Mon Jun 11, 2007 02:59pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea
they are too busy officiating to notice lopsided foul counts
What do you mean by this? :confused:

Mark Padgett Mon Jun 11, 2007 03:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Mark,

I think that was one of the best answers I have ever heard from you. No sarcasm and just plain dope about the topic. I am impressed my man, very impressed. :D

BITS,

Mark gave the best answer by far (I would not do any justice to add anything).

Peace
Thanks, Rut. I guess the meds must finally be kicking in. ;)

blindzebra Mon Jun 11, 2007 03:42pm
All you can do is do everything the right way, be a great partner, communicate well at every opportunity, and pay close attention to all the game management issues.

When all that fails, extend as much as you can to keep the players safe, and get in, get done, get out.

truerookie Mon Jun 11, 2007 07:11pm
I do not like the term weak partner. It seems harsh. I view those individuals whom may not have fully developed their officiating as a working progress. We all were once viewed into this WEAK PARTNER manner when we first started.

rainmaker Mon Jun 11, 2007 09:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
I do not like the term weak partner. It seems harsh. I view those individuals whom may not have fully developed their officiating as a working progress. We all were once viewed into this WEAK PARTNER manner when we first started.
Rook-- I respectfully disagree. I would define someone who is just starting out as a "rookie" or a "beginner" or "in over his head". A "weak partner" is someone who probably should be able to handle this game, but just isn't making it, somehow.

There are plenty of those who are working hard and trying to get better, but they're just not there yet. They make plenty of mistakes, but it's a different kind of mistakes from the person who's been reffing for 5 or 6 years and still can't handle a 7th grade girls' game.

The rookie can be instructed and can be managed, he's coachable. The stronger partner can work with him, and help them both work together better. That weak partner is the one who inspired the phrase, "Get in, get done, get out".

Btw, I get the feeling you're a rookie, and not a weaker partner. But of course, I've never worked with you.

truerookie Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:13am
Rainmaker, I respectfully, respectfully do not wholeheartly agree with you.:) I am not trying to defend anyone I'm just stating that the term "weak partner" is too harsh of a term. In our own personal opinions, anyone could be classified as a "weak partner if they do not meet our expectations as officials. This is my point.

The rookie can be instructed and can be managed, he's coachable. The stronger partner can work with him, and help them both work together better. That weak partner is the one who inspired the phrase, "Get in, get done, get out".

I understand from your aformentioned statement that consistency is optimum when working with someone who needs more seasoning as an official. However, what about those officials whom been calling five or six years and all it's been is Rec Ball. How do we categorize them?

a) rookie
b) beginner
c) in over their head
d) weak partner

Finally, I like the parting shot you took. You have in your own personal opinion just categorize me as a rookie. Why do we have to put people in categories we do not know personally?:confused:

Btw, I get the feeling you're a rookie, and not a weaker partner. But of course, I've never worked with you.[/QUOTE]

lrpalmer3 Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:21am
Quote:
Originally Posted by OHBBREF
I think the only thing you can do is work on your managment skills in these sithuations.
This is so true. Also, communicate with players and coaches. Ask them to help you out because each official on the court has a different level of experience. You can't do this in the middle of the season, but try it at camp.

Scrapper1 Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
Finally, I like the parting shot you took. You have in your own personal opinion just categorize me as a rookie. Why do we have to put people in categories we do not know personally?:confused:

Btw, I get the feeling you're a rookie, and not a weaker partner. But of course, I've never worked with you.
I don't think it was a shot. I think it was intended to be a compliment. You may be a new guy (rookie), but you want to get better, you're willing to discuss and learn and you're on your way to being a good official. You're NOT a 7th year guy who's still only doing rec leagues (weaker partner).

truerookie Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
I don't think it was a shot. I think it was intended to be a compliment. You may be a new guy (rookie), but you want to get better, you're willing to discuss and learn and you're on your way to being a good official. You're NOT a 7th year guy who's still only doing rec leagues (weaker partner).

Scrapper, initially, I did not see it as a compliment. I viewed it as a shot based on the content of the thread. However, now you have pointed it out. I can err on the compliment side aspect.

rainmaker Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:33am
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
Scrapper, initially, I did not see it as a compliment. I viewed it as a shot based on the content of the thread. However, now you have pointed it out. I can err on the compliment side aspect.
Right. I was calling you what you call yourself, a rookie. And doing it in a good way. You are NOT a weak partner, even if you're in over your head, sometimes.

In answer to your question about what to call someone who's done several years of rec only, I'd say it depends largely on their attitude. When they first come into "official" ball, are they willing to take the next step? Do they listen to suggestions and try to get better? Then they're rookies-who-are-working-hard. Or taking-the-next-step. Or if they get into a tough game, but give it their best, they're in over their head, but working hard and learning fast. Otherwise, they're just "weak partners".

truerookie Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:50am
Rainmaker, everything is cool. It has been about four years since I researched and found this site. At the time, I thought it would be interesting to identify myself as a rookie to the people on this site. Informing them, I am/was new to the avocation. I have grown tremendously as an official from those on this site. Even the ones who may have stated, I should take my officials shirt and work at Champ's shoe store.;) They know who they are!!

It is my belief that in some capacity we all can be viewed as a weak partner to others. I believe it is safe to say we all have weaknesses. Thus, labelling someone else as a weak partner in my opinion is inappropriate. I know I have weaknesses I'm human.;)

blindzebra Tue Jun 12, 2007 01:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
Rainmaker, everything is cool. It has been about four years since I researched and found this site. At the time, I thought it would be interesting to identify myself as a rookie to the people on this site. Informing them, I am/was new to the avocation. I have grown tremendously as an official from those on this site. Even the ones who may have stated, I should take my officials shirt and work at Champ's shoe store.;) They know who they are!!

It is my belief that in some capacity we all can be viewed as a weak partner to others. I believe it is safe to say we all have weaknesses. Thus, labelling someone else as a weak partner in my opinion is inappropriate. I know I have weaknesses I'm human.;)
So what would be a better term for that partner that is making your life a living hell? IMO, "weak" is being nice.

Now we can try to break down why they are "weak" and that can lead to different descriptions:

1. New...now this is where we all were at one point and while it isn't always fun, very few of us hate working these games if the new official is trying to get better.

2. The rec ref...these guys hate real reffing because of the politics, IOW, their way didn't cut it so real reffing is beneath them. They won't use the proper mechanics, they are 5 years behind in rule changes, and you won't have much of a chance to make them better...or your day easier.

3. The cash cow ref...these are the guys with the $10 dollar, light weight, collared ref shirts...usually untucked...metal, pea whistle, no mechanics, have never seen a rule book much less read one. IOW, our worst nightmare.

Now, it's possible to have overlap as well. The #1 fast on the way to #2 or #3. Usually, it's the combo of #2 and #3 that is the worst.

truerookie Tue Jun 12, 2007 02:37pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
So what would be a better term for that partner that is making your life a living hell? IMO, "weak" is being nice.

Now we can try to break down why they are "weak" and that can lead to different descriptions:

1. New...now this is where we all were at one point and while it isn't always fun, very few of us hate working these games if the new official is trying to get better.

2. The rec ref...these guys hate real reffing because of the politics, IOW, their way didn't cut it so real reffing is beneath them. They won't use the proper mechanics, they are 5 years behind in rule changes, and you won't have much of a chance to make them better...or your day easier.

3. The cash cow ref...these are the guys with the $10 dollar, light weight, collared ref shirts...usually untucked...metal, pea whistle, no mechanics, have never seen a rule book much less read one. IOW, our worst nightmare.

Now, it's possible to have overlap as well. The #1 fast on the way to #2 or #3. Usually, it's the combo of #2 and #3 that is the worst.

Blindzebra, you have raised some valid points. You also imposed a question upon me which I will answer.

Your question: So what would be a better term for that partner that is making your life a living hell? CLUELESS!;)

JRutledge Tue Jun 12, 2007 02:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
Blindzebra, you have raised some valid points. You also imposed a question upon me which I will answer.

Your question: So what would be a better term for that partner that is making your life a living hell? CLUELESS!;)
Why are you so upset what people call a partner? If you are not completely competent in anything, then someone might have to carry the crew or organization in order for something to go right. It is a lot easier to work with people that are equally versed and have similar experience. When a person does not have that they are weak on some level. This is why when officials have a choice, they pick the more experienced official most of the time. Why there weak is not always the issue. Some officials are very willing to be helped or take advice and other officials think they have everything figured out.

Peace

Back In The Saddle Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:00pm
Are those the flashing lights of the PC police I see?
 
Huh? The term weak is too strong? That's a new one on me. :confused:

Somewhere out there in the world is the greatest referee working today. Somewhere else out there is the worst ref working today. The rest of us fall somewhere in a continuum between these two exceptional officials. Which means that each of us is weaker than some partners and stronger than others. It's not derogatory, it's a fact of life that must be dealt with on the court.

I merely posed a question which grew out of an unpleasant, very real situation. In asking my question I have not called anybody out; I have not named any names. My question isn't even about the official who inspired it; it's about how to better handle the next one. And there will be a next one. To try and steer the conversation around the truth for the sake of preserving the tender feelings of some official who is not present, has not been named, and is unknown to anybody else in the conversation is just plain silly and dilutes the usefulness of the discussion. :rolleyes:

dblref Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
Thanks, Rut. I guess the meds must finally be kicking in. ;)
No, no, no. He was talking about the OTHER Mark. :p

Jurassic Referee Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
So what would be a better term for that partner that is making your life a living hell?
Old School.

dblref Tue Jun 12, 2007 08:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
Blindzebra, you have raised some valid points. You also imposed a question upon me which I will answer.

Your question: So what would be a better term for that partner that is making your life a living hell? CLUELESS!;)
Your talking about Old School. Right?

truerookie Tue Jun 12, 2007 09:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Why are you so upset what people call a partner? If you are not completely competent in anything, then someone might have to carry the crew or organization in order for something to go right. It is a lot easier to work with people that are equally versed and have similar experience. When a person does not have that they are weak on some level. This is why when officials have a choice, they pick the more experienced official most of the time. Why there weak is not always the issue. Some officials are very willing to be helped or take advice and other officials think they have everything figured out.

Peace
JRut, I'm not upset about anything.

truerookie Tue Jun 12, 2007 09:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by dblref
Your talking about Old School. Right?
Who?????????

JRutledge Tue Jun 12, 2007 10:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
JRut, I'm not upset about anything.
OK....Then why do you care what they call a partner that is not as competent?

Peace

truerookie Wed Jun 13, 2007 09:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
OK....Then why do you care what they call a partner that is not as competent?

Peace
I do not believe it proper to label someone in that manner. Especially, when they may not be aware of it.

Is it so hard to say? I worked with an official who is still developing as an official.

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 11:47am
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
I do not believe it proper to label someone in that manner. Especially, when they may not be aware of it.

Is it so hard to say? I worked with an official who is still developing as an official.
I do not have a problem with the label. Labels are just apart of life. I think calling someone a "weak partner" is a lot better than saying they are terrible or "he cannot work." I know we are having this conversation here, but in the real world people are not always as kind. Let us not be so PC that we lose the point that was trying to be made. Whatever you call someone not as experienced the point is that many of us will work with someone that is weaker, not as good, not as experienced, not as competent for a lot of reasons. When we do run into someone like that, how do you handle it? That was all the OP was about.

Peace

jeffpea Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
What do you mean by this? :confused:
officials who are "in over their heads" have trouble keeping up with the speed of the game....the only thing they can do is to try and focus on the plays happening in front of them; they do no have the ability to pay attention to game management issues...one of them being the foul count (i.e. Visitor Fouls 8 - Home Fouls 1).

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:21pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
I do not believe it proper to label someone in that manner. Especially, when they may not be aware of it.

Is it so hard to say? I worked with an official who is still developing as an official.
But in most cases the official that is that weak partner, isn't in development they just don't care, that's the point.

Like I said before, you may be working with someone new who is trying, so yes they are "weaker" than you but that isn't the question being asked in this thread. The OP was talking about that partner where all the tricks you'd use with that inexperienced official...communicating every chance you get, being a great partner, leading by example, staying on top of all game management situations...just don't work.

Those partners that frustrate me are the ones who don't care, don't want to improve because they either think they don't need to or don't care because all they want is the cash. Those guys aren't developing.

truerookie Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I do not have a problem with the label. Labels are just apart of life. I think calling someone a "weak partner" is a lot better than saying they are terrible or "he cannot work." I know we are having this conversation here, but in the real world people are not always as kind. Let us not be so PC that we lose the point that was trying to be made. Whatever you call someone not as experienced the point is that many of us will work with someone that is weaker, not as good, not as experienced, not as competent for a lot of reasons. When we do run into someone like that, how do you handle it? That was all the OP was about.

Peace
I got what the OP was seeking initial. My attempt was to point out that sometimes we may have to take into consideration how we label other from our own personal perspective.

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:24pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffpea
usually a weaker partner is just trying to "survive" the game by trying to get the calls right. he/she can't focus on all the "other stuff" (i.e. game management). that's where you have to step in and handle most, if not all, of those duties. take the pressure off of him or her by talking to/dealing with players, coaches, problem situations, etc. they are too busy officiating to notice lopsided foul counts, players who are becoming a problem, and controlling the benches.

you can't make every call for them (although you may have to "reach" a little now and then).
Why should we care about lopsided foul counts?

Our job is calling what's there, not making the fouls even.:rolleyes:

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by truerookie
I got what the OP was seeking initial. My attempt was to point out that sometimes we may have to take into consideration how we label other from our own personal perspective.
This is where you and I disagree. We are talking about someone's ability; we are not talking about a feature that cannot change. Actually many of us here could and have said a lot worse.

Peace

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:34pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Why should we care about lopsided foul counts?

Our job is calling what's there, not making the fouls even.:rolleyes:
You might not ultimately care, but you might want to know what the fuss is about. Also if I have 8 to 1 in fouls, I certainly do not want to miss any fouls against the team that has 8. Having said that the foul count can get to 20 to 1 for all I care. I think good officials are at the very least aware of the disparity. Often times there is a good reason for the foul disparity like one team playing zone and the other team playing a full court press.

Peace

truerookie Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
This is where you and I disagree. We are talking about someone's ability; we are not talking about a feature that cannot change. Actually many of us here could and have said a lot worse.

Peace
Ok. I see you point and the points you have made.

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
You might not ultimately care, but you might want to know what the fuss is about. Also if I have 8 to 1 in fouls, I certainly do not want to miss any fouls against the team that has 8. Having said that the foul count can get to 20 to 1 for all I care. I think good officials are at the very least aware of the disparity. Often times there is a good reason for the foul disparity like one team playing zone and the other team playing a full court press.

Peace
We don't need to communicate it's 8-1 with our partners, since we'd be hearing call it both ways and hey ref it's 8-1 from the fans and coaches anyway.;)

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 01:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
We don't need to communicate it's 8-1 with our partners, since we'd be hearing call it both ways and hey ref it's 8-1 from the fans and coaches anyway.;)
I do not think anyone suggested that we communicate with our partners about anything. Game management issues often are things you personally are aware of and we only communicate to our partners when necessary. But a coach going off about the foul count is likely and personally being aware of this will help you answer a question about it or make sure you are calling similar plays all over the court.

Peace

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I do not think anyone suggested that we communicate with our partners about anything. Game management issues often are things you personally are aware of and we only communicate to our partners when necessary. But a coach going off about the foul count is likely and personally being aware of this will help you answer a question about it or make sure you are calling similar plays all over the court.

Peace
You answer a coach yelling foul counts and have to think about it?

WOW.

I basically have two responses:

"Tell your kids to stop fouling."

"Are you saying I'm cheating or incompetent?" "Because I really want to know which T I'll be giving you."

And I'm going to continue calling what is there and not start looking for stuff to make the scoreboard look better.

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
You answer a coach yelling foul counts and have to think about it?

WOW.

I basically have two responses:

"Tell your kids to stop fouling."

"Are you saying I'm cheating or incompetent?" "Because I really want to know which T I'll be giving you."

And I'm going to continue calling what is there and not start looking for stuff to make the scoreboard look better.
Who said anything about thinking about it?

To me foul counts are no different than being aware of who is jawing at each other and nipping that in the bud.

Do not blow things out of portion, what we call "game management" are things that we should be aware of in order to keep things smooth. If a coach is constantly gripping about something you should address it eventually or things might go in a direction you do not want it to go.

Peace

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Who said anything about thinking about it?

To me foul counts are no different than being aware of who is jawing at each other and nipping that in the bud.

Do not blow things out of portion, what we call "game management" are things that we should be aware of in order to keep things smooth. If a coach is constantly gripping about something you should address it eventually or things might go in a direction you do not want it to go.

Peace
BS...There is no reason to be aware of foul counts, none.

Coaches yapping about it, you address the yapping, not the foul count causing the yapping.

As for game management, I'll nip that in the bud too.

Coach A is yapping about foul counts...suddenly JRut "finds" a couple of fouls on team B, since he's now aware of a foul disperity...coach B sees this and you know what happens?

Now you have two coaches yapping...your game management just got harder.

I suppose the howler monkey yelling 3 seconds every trip has you scanning the paint, making sure you haven't missed the big guy toasting marshmellows, too?:rolleyes:

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
BS...There is no reason to be aware of foul counts, none.

Coaches yapping about it, you address the yapping, not the foul count causing the yapping.

I suppose the howler monkey yelling 3 seconds every trip has you scanning the paint, making sure you haven't missed the big guy toasting marshmellows, too?:rolleyes:
Because it is not important to you does not make it not important for other officials. BTW, it is very important to keep your behind out of having a correctable error (which has happen to me based on what the foul board says).

Also if a coach is yelling 3 seconds every time up the court it will be addressed. Then again most coaches at the level I work get the hint and it is almost never addressed.

Zeb, you and I have already established we do not see eye to eye on things. Why would this be any different? ;)

Peace

OHBBREF Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Now you have two coaches yapping...your game management just got harder.

I suppose the howler monkey yelling 3 seconds every trip has you scanning the paint, making sure you haven't missed the big guy toasting marshmellows, too?:rolleyes:
This is where that software eliminating the noise by whining coaches and fans would come in handy I am going to google for that stuff

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
BS...There is no reason to be aware of foul counts, none.

Coaches yapping about it, you address the yapping, not the foul count causing the yapping.

As for game management, I'll nip that in the bud too.

Coach A is yapping about foul counts...suddenly JRut "finds" a couple of fouls on team B, since he's now aware of a foul disperity...coach B sees this and you know what happens?

Now you have two coaches yapping...your game management just got harder.
It is clear that you want to twist what I said. I never said anything about "finding" a foul. I also did not say that the coach influences the decisions I make. Here we do three person almost exclusively and there are times you are right in front of a coach. They tend to ask questions or make statements with you standing in front of them. Sometimes I say nothing but just give a look.

You always want to turn something I say into a nefarious or sinister reasoning. It is not like Jeff or I are talking about this in a bubble. The camp we both attended last year these things were openly talked about and every person talking about them were much higher level officials than both of us at this current time.

Peace

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Because it is not important to you does not make it not important for other officials. BTW, it is very important to keep your behind out of having a correctable error (which has happen to me based on what the foul board says).

Also if a coach is yelling 3 seconds every time up the court it will be addressed. Then again most coaches at the level I work get the hint and it is almost never addressed.

Rocky, you and I have already established we do not see eye to eye on things. Why would this be any different? ;)

Peace
Let's see...we are talking about being aware of a disparity in foul counts and you spin it to being aware of the bonus...typical.

You were the one who said, you will be aware and won't be passing on something you could call against the team on the plus side of 8-1...let's not back track now.

Just admit it, you want to get a coach off your back by making a cosmetic change in the foul count, instead of calling what's there and handling the howler monkey.

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 02:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
It is clear that you want to twist what I said. I never said anything about "finding" a foul. I also did not say that the coach influences the decisions I make. Here we do three person almost exclusively and there are times you are right in front of a coach. They tend to ask questions or make statements with you standing in front of them. Sometimes I say nothing but just give a look.

You always want to turn something I say into a nefarious or sinister reasoning. It is not like Jeff or I are talking about this in a bubble. The camp we both attended last year these things were openly talked about and every person talking about them were much higher level officials than both of us at this current time.

Peace
Oh, really?

"Also if I have 8 to 1 in fouls, I certainly do not want to miss any fouls against the team that has 8."

Sounds like finding a foul to me.

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Let's see...we are talking about being aware of a disparity in foul counts and you spin it to being aware of the bonus...typical.
Is the foul count not about more than just one issue? Bonus and when we shoot bonus is something coaches tend to bring up. And if you mess up, it is going to be an issue as well as answering questions about, "Why are they shooting the bonus and we are not?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
You were the one who said, you will be aware and won't be passing on something you could call against the team on the plus side of 8-1...let's not back track now.
If you are truly an experienced official, you know we pass on many things. Just like the play at the end of Game 3, we make decisions not to call certain plays because they do not pass the "smell test." Maybe I have called an illegal screen earlier in the game and I for some reason passed on other screens that might have been suspect (but were really fouls) and I and my partners swallowed our whistles because there was hardly any advantage or I did not get a good look at them. So as a competent official that might have missed something, I am not going to be fooled the next time in to not calling something that was there. If you read what I said, we might get to 20 to 1 before I call a foul on the team with 1 foul. But at least I want to know in my mind and with my partners (when we talk later in the locker room)

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Just admit it, you want to get a coach off your back by making a cosmetic change in the foul count, instead of calling what's there and handling the howler monkey.
I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I worked this past year in Quincy, Illinois and as north as Grayslake or Antioch (use a map). I also worked two games in the Quad Cities and paid more in gas to get there than I did working the game. Now ask yourself (after looking at a map) how many coaches did I pass to work those games? Ask yourself how many times will I see these coaches again in my career? Unless the live in the Chicago area, likely I might not see them again in the next 4 or 5 years. And there are a couple of conferences in this area I do not work. Why would I give a damn about some coach that I will not see again?

Peace

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Oh, really?

"Also if I have 8 to 1 in fouls, I certainly do not want to miss any fouls against the team that has 8."

Sounds like finding a foul to me.
I understand the concept is over your head. I will stop trying to explain it to you. ;)

Peace

Jurassic Referee Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:05pm
http://www.csicop.org/si/9204/popcorn.gif

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Is the foul count not about more than just one issue? Bonus and when we shoot bonus is something coaches tend to bring up. And if you mess up, it is going to be an issue as well as answering questions about, "Why are they shooting the bonus and we are not?"



If you are truly an experienced official, you know we pass on many things. Just like the play at the end of Game 3, we make decisions not to call certain plays because they do not pass the "smell test." Maybe I have called an illegal screen earlier in the game and I for some reason passed on other screens that might have been suspect (but were really fouls) and I and my partners swallowed our whistles because there was hardly any advantage or I did not get a good look at them. So as a competent official that might have missed something, I am not going to be fooled the next time in to not calling something that was there. If you read what I said, we might get to 20 to 1 before I call a foul on the team with 1 foul. But at least I want to know in my mind and with my partners (when we talk later in the locker room)



I live in the western suburbs of Chicago. I worked this past year in Quincy, Illinois and as north as Grayslake or Antioch (use a map). I also worked two games in the Quad Cities and paid more in gas to get there than I did working the game. Now ask yourself (after looking at a map) how many coaches did I pass to work those games? Ask yourself how many times will I see these coaches again in my career? Unless the live in the Chicago area, likely I might not see them again in the next 4 or 5 years. And there are a couple of conferences in this area I do not work. Why would I give a damn about some coach that I will not see again?

Peace
Ahh, yes when all else fails post the resume.

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I understand the concept is over your head. I will stop trying to explain it to you. ;)

Peace

No the concept is a cosmetic one, because of the scrutiny D-1 guys are under, that HS officials aren't.

You are trying to impose a philosophy that doesn't belong in a HS game, just like calling a HS game using NBA guidelines isn't a good idea either.

There are plenty of these "concepts" out there, doesn't make them correct or appropriate for lower levels. Most aren't correct for the levels they are at either, but I regress.

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
No the concept is a cosmetic one, because of the scrutiny D-1 guys are under, that HS officials aren't.
Speak for yourself. ;)

Maybe this is how it is where you live, but not here. I worked a football game about 2 seasons ago and I was involved in 2 calls that not only were scrutinized, but was made a major issue by the assignor. Now this game was not even on public access or a major game in the bigger scheme of things. The paper did not even make an issue out of the plays and you would have thought the world was coming to and end. The game even affected my crew working the following year for this particular assignor. Now this was a football game which is a distant second on the scale that basketball has in this state. And you say that D1 officials are under more scrutiny? I will agree that D1 officials are under much pressure from more sides, but if we (the lowly HS official) screws up, I have seen similar punishments brought down or plays being dissected as they are on the D1 level.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
You are trying to impose a philosophy that doesn't belong in a HS game, just like calling a HS game using NBA guidelines isn't a good idea either.
We disagree. I do not even believe I used the term "college" in my discussion of this issue. I certainly did not say "college philosophy." Next thing you are going to say I should not watch the clock after every basket or during a timeout, because in all accounts that is a "college philosophy" as it relates the shot clock and something hardly ever taught at the HS level (at least around here).

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
There are plenty of these "concepts" out there, doesn't make them correct or appropriate for lower levels. Most aren't correct for the levels they are at either, but I regress.
There are a lot of "concepts" that apply to all levels. Once again, I did not realize making sure you are consistent on both ends and that you are not missing fouls is a "concept" for only college and the NBA.

Peace

M&M Guy Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
At least your movie popcorn looks fresh...

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:32pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Ahh, yes when all else fails post the resume.
Usually a resume involves dates, specific conferences and even level. And where I work and when I work affects how I look at what I do. Sorry, I do not work in a 10 mile radius and everything a coach says affects me to the point I become stagnant. So when you say I want a coach off my back, then why would I care if I might not see a coach ever again?

I worked a game in Peoria, Illinois on Sunday (I must emphasize it was a damn summer league game that pays less than what I will make where I currently live) because I was near the town and I was asked to by a friend of mine to work with them. I guess that is a resume issue to you as well.

Peace

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:41pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Usually a resume involves dates, specific conferences and even level. And where I work and when I work affects how I look at what I do. Sorry, I do not work in a 10 mile radius and everything a coach says affects me to the point I become stagnant. So when you say I want a coach off my back, then why would I care if I might not see a coach ever again?

I worked a game in Peoria, Illinois on Sunday (I must emphasize it was a damn summer league game that pays less than what I will make where I currently live) because I was near the town and I was asked to by a friend of mine to work with them. I guess that is a resume issue to you as well.

Peace
Please, whenever you get cornered we see the same old tired here's where I work, followed by the equally tired, "Well that may be where you are but around here."

As if the sun rises and sets on the Illinois...guess what? Nobody gives a crap where your games are or what they do in your area, doesn't change the fact you are full of crap.

rockyroad Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Rocky, you and I have already established we do not see eye to eye on things. Why would this be any different? ;)

Peace

Hey!! How did I get drug into this mess? You're arguing with blindzebra, not me...we haven't disagreed about anything in a long time.

Mark Dexter Wed Jun 13, 2007 03:57pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Because it is not important to you does not make it not important for other officials. BTW, it is very important to keep your behind out of having a correctable error (which has happen to me based on what the foul board says).
I'm with Rut on this one. Yes, 99 times out of 100, the disparity is just because of how the teams are playing - in this case, knowing about it might let me address the coach if he complains about it and might keep my crew out of trouble. Also, I don't have a problem with looking at my calls and wondering if there IS something I'm missing. I'm not going to invent or ignore fouls, but maybe I've been stuck on one end of the court for a while and I'm just not getting good angles that night. Knowing about that in advance can help me adjust and make better calls.

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:00pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Please, whenever you get cornered we see the same old tired here's where I work, followed by the equally tired, "Well that may be where you are but around here."

As if the sun rises and sets on the Illinois...guess what? Nobody gives a crap where your games are or what they do in your area, doesn't change the fact you are full of crap.
Here is the thing zeb, you asked a question and I gave you and answer. If you do not like the answer, then do not ask the question. It is really that simply. Just because you are insecure in what you do, that does not mean it applies to me.

Peace

Mark Dexter Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
No the concept is a cosmetic one, because of the scrutiny D-1 guys are under, that HS officials aren't.

You are trying to impose a philosophy that doesn't belong in a HS game, just like calling a HS game using NBA guidelines isn't a good idea either.

There are plenty of these "concepts" out there, doesn't make them correct or appropriate for lower levels. Most aren't correct for the levels they are at either, but I regress.
I've seen plenty of D-I games with a wide disparity in the foul count.

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:04pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Dexter
I'm with Rut on this one. Yes, 99 times out of 100, the disparity is just because of how the teams are playing - in this case, knowing about it might let me address the coach if he complains about it and might keep my crew out of trouble. Also, I don't have a problem with looking at my calls and wondering if there IS something I'm missing. I'm not going to invent or ignore fouls, but maybe I've been stuck on one end of the court for a while and I'm just not getting good angles that night. Knowing about that in advance can help me adjust and make better calls.
This is exactly what I have been saying. I guess it is wrong to evaluate the job you are doing out there. There are times on calls coaches have a point. I have yet to officiate a perfect game.

Peace

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad
Hey!! How did I get drug into this mess? You're arguing with blindzebra, not me...we haven't disagreed about anything in a long time.
Sorry Rocky, I am going back from one post to another. I will correct the post.

Peace

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
Here is the thing zeb, you asked a question and I gave you and answer. If you do not like the answer, then do not ask the question. It is really that simply. Just because you are insecure in what you do, that does not mean it applies to me.

Peace
Yeah I'm the one who needs to constantly talk about my games, the levels I work, and who I know from camps to make my points...and I'm the insecure one.:rolleyes:

And just for a taste of your own medicine...which one of us worked a state final this year?

See how relevant that was to the discussion?;)

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:25pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
Yeah I'm the one who needs to constantly talk about my games, the levels I work, and who I know from camps to make my points...and I'm the insecure one.:rolleyes:
I talked about where I worked; I did not talk about games. Only one of those towns I mentioned has one HS in them. So even the most knowledgeable person might not even know where I worked and level. But you cannot seem to address that and make an assumption.

Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
And just for a taste of your own medicine...which one of us worked a state final this year?

See how relevant that was to the discussion?;)
That is a taste of my own medicine? Huh?? :rolleyes: Two of the best officials I in the country are from the surrounding area that I live. One lives in the same town I currently do. Neither has worked HS playoffs in the past 20 years (from what I understand) let alone a State Final. They did work in the NCAA Tournament and were on National TV several times between the two. So let us put State Final accomplishments in perspective.

Peace

blindzebra Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:30pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by JRutledge
I talked about where I worked; I did not talk about games. Only one of those towns I mentioned has one HS in them. So even the most knowledgeable person might not even know where I worked and level. But you cannot seem to address that and make an assumption.



That is a taste of my own medicine? Huh?? :rolleyes: Two of the best officials I in the country are from the surrounding area that I live. One lives in the same town I currently do. Neither has worked HS playoffs in the past 20 years (from what I understand) let alone a State Final. They did work in the NCAA Tournament and were on National TV several times between the two. So let us put State Final accomplishments in perspective.

Peace
So that needs to be in perspective because YOU DIDN'T WORK ONE, huh?;)

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:33pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Dexter
I've seen plenty of D-I games with a wide disparity in the foul count.
All you have to do is see the NCAA Tournament. I believe Ohio State fouled a lot more than most of their opponents on their way to the championship game.

Peace

JRutledge Wed Jun 13, 2007 04:44pm
Do you want to deal with facts?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by blindzebra
So that needs to be in perspective because YOU DIDN'T WORK ONE, huh?;)
Why did I not work a state final? State the facts, not just use innuendo.

Peace


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:37pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1