Agree with that. And to expand on it, the officials within a conference are different also. Different personalities; different ideas on officiating; different tolerance levels, different ideas sometimes on how much contact to allow, etc. Jmo but I don't think that you're ever going to be able to regiment your training/evaluation down to where everything can be called exactly the same. I think that it's more reasonable to ask if any particular game was called fairly and evenly and kept under control while doing so. More often than not, the players/teams decide what kind of game that we're going to have, and we just follow along doing the best that we can.

Again, jmo but I think that NBA officiating is entertainment based, and that's why it's hard to compare the over-all effectiveness of their officiating staff with that of a top NCAA D1 conference. They're two different animals, with different rules and different goals. And that doesn't really make one set of officials markedly better than the other. I do wonder sometimes if the NBA expects too much from their officials.

Jmo, based on my impressions and not that much actual knowledge of the current NBA training/evaluation program......:)

Your estimate is pretty good. For documented support, Referee Magazine put the figure at approximately 900 for NCAA D1 Womens officials on page 61 of its July 2007 issue.

Interesting article this morning citing other NBA referees....

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baske...e-fixing_N.htm

They don't seem to be happy with the current NBA system, which was my impression from afar also. One interesting quote was the one about NBA guidelines directing officials to make calls all over the court.

Here's another one......
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/baske...-reviews_N.htm.
Many observers are high school and college referees. Hmmmmmm.....

They are all just bitter.

They all can't be bitter, but very few seem to have positive things to say. The idea of calling all over the court is being mis-represented. The NBA, which I agree, has a philosophy that each official has a different angle of the play and that when a foul occurs, the best angle to see the foul could be the off-official (non-prmiary area official) because the play/foul turned right into their clear-line-of-sight vision provided their in proper NBA court position. I saw a WNBA game yesterday, where the C had a great call, where the post player swung away from the lead, and the contact occured in the C's line of vision but out of their NCAA primary coverage area. You may not agree with it, but it's how 3-person officiating should be, imho. It's not perfect, but it's better than not allowing an official that would have had the best angle to see the play to not call it (or even look in that area) because it is out of their primary coverage area.

One arguement that NCAA/HS coaches have is that officials in their leagues can't make a call outside of their PCA area even though they may have saw the violation.

Great discussion guys after my #139 post. Scrapper1, thank you for this anology. It makes a lot of sense, and I think it is being deployed in the NBA as well. But just like BTaylor said, because the NBA looks at every play/call/no-call, NBA officials are under bigger scrutiny. It is still worth reading to me because it strengthens my belief that if you are not sure, you got no call. Better to let the game continue on then to reach and be wrong. I must admit, I have been there where the game was faster than I could keep up with. Maybe that's what happened in the Spurs-Suns game, but the fact that it happened more often than not, leaves a bad impression on the NBA officials.

One note Scrapper1, that can not go unchallenged. If any NCAA crew continues to miss calls, like in the Spurs-Suns series. They will be in deep do-do. We can let one or two go by, but it needs to stay at a relatively low number. What happened in the championship NCAA Men's game, is the officials got lucky. One team was way better than the other. It gave them room for error, and there was plenty. However, if that game would have been close, it would have been a completely different story with the NCAA officials on that game.

Nobody has the "luxury" of making bad calls. But they happen at every level. The NCAA (in general) says, "We'd rather have you miss a marginal call than whistle a bad marginal call." That's not luxury, that's just a difference in opinion from what you say happens at the NBA level (which I've never done, obviously).

I don't mean to insult you, but you're kidding yourself if you think "big money" is not an issue in the college game. The players aren't getting it (legally, anyway); but coaches and the schools themselves are fighting for their cut of $1 billion every year.

I don't think it's about being aggressive or not, personally. I think it's about getting plays right.

Very good point. I was talking in general terms, but you're exactly right about this particular type of play. Lots of observers will say, when bodies get tangled and go down, we have to have a whistle. I don't always agree with that, but that is one play that many people would rather have a marginal whistle than a marginal no-call.

I really wish we could get could do something about you account. You can't get out of your own way can you? You are like Terrel Owens, great at what you do, but.....

It is NOT illegal to share your opinion on this forum. By these two individuals pontificating as you put it, a very decent discussion has sprung. I for one, have learned more from this discussion and interaction, then reading in a damn rule book. Of course, I don't expect you to understand that but sometimes, I really wish you would stop with the personal attacks, and just pass on the discussion and let us nobody's talk and debate on this forum. Maybe it doesn't help you but others (like myself) may get some benefit from it.

Moderators, it should be illegal to continuously personally attack others on this forum. To use this forum and the data within it, to belittle and berate other officials or forum members should be outlawed. Posts #148 should not be allowed. That is abusing this forum and the data in it. This culture of attacking one another over and over again has produced a lot of unhappy officials. Just look at the number of retired NBA officials that have nothing nice to say about the enterprise that they served for years. From engaging this forum alone, which is a good representation of official associations around the country. I have nothing good to say about the senior leadership here.

Added sentence to post #148.

Have a nice day....

See, Jurassic, it's your fault there are unhappy ex-officials. You mean old bast@rd, you.
You hurt its feelings.

Yup, and I gave my opinion about you, JMO.

Gee, I hope that he never finds out that I'm responsible for global warming too.:D

Had a play where two players are going for an airborne ball. They both jumped in the air to get it and they hit each other, both crashing to the ground. Neither one ended up with the ball and both sides were yelling for a foul.

Coach is in my ear and I said to him, "what did the other player do that was illegal?" Coach shut up after hearing that. Not all train wrecks are fouls, but I think greater than half are.

Besides knowing my name you don't know jack about me. You don't know where I've worked or at what level.

I don't tell you what's wrong about college officials, I tell you what I PERSONALLY don't like about how we as college officials are supposed to and taught to officiate the game. I love to ref college ball but I believe in the pro mechanics. I don't hide that. People can hate on the observers. I met one of them recently and he seemed quite knowledgeable to me. I also met one of the group supervisors. Once again he seemed like an intelligent basketball referee. I do somewhat agree with Hue Hollins about getting the best of the best to be observers or group supervisors. Why don't they do it then?

Under the "more" category you can list both of which you mentioned.

As far as listening more than talking, you're right and if we met I would listen to you talk the whole time, granted I would ask some questions as well. I know if we were face to face you wouldn't attack me, you would talk to me like a human being, at least I hope you would.

Jurassic you're HS rules knowledge is uncanny. You can remember alot and I think you are a big asset to alot of the people on this forum, but we, like coaches and refs sometimes, have polar personalities and beliefs which can cause for butting heads. It doesn't help that you think I am an arrogant young kid and you are alot older than me, but if I can't have my own opinion because I am younger than how do I learn. If we can't discuss basketball plays and have an opinion, then what hopes do I have of having my own thoughts on the court and becoming a better referee?

P.S. I'm whacking the kid if the ball doesn't go in when I believe it had a chance to. I then go tell the coach that i judged that he wasn't making a legit attempt to block the ball. haha:D

I think that Scrappy is talking about where there is a train wreck in a block/charge situation. Iow, the offensive player has the ball. That is a situation where a lot of evaluators like to see a call of some kind.

Two players going after a loose ball and colliding is a whole different kinda train wreck.