Unsportsmanlike?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I'm neither JR nor JR, and I've been pretty much an interested spectator for this thread. But, I have some thoughts.

First, I wouldn't back A1 off if B1 is talking to a teammate. All B1 has to do is turn around and his back is then to A1, and if B2 is standing there, A1 can't get right back in front of him without fouling.

As for where the line is, it's certainly beyond that for me.

And, the "legal on the street" issue definitely doesn't apply. If I go down the street setting screens and boxing people out, that's not going to be legal, either.

Wow. I gotta admit I'm surprised, since this seems pretty obvious to me. But I also know that I do tend to be pretty bossy and overbearing. I always want everyone to be very polite and respectful and I don't understand why it's okay to not do that. But I guess if everyone disagrees with me on this, I'll bow to the experience and majority of y'all. I'm also fairly certain I"ll never see this.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Wow. I gotta admit I'm surprised, since this seems pretty obvious to me. But I also know that I do tend to be pretty bossy and overbearing. I always want everyone to be very polite and respectful and I don't understand why it's okay to not do that. But I guess if everyone disagrees with me on this, I'll bow to the experience and majority of y'all. I'm also fairly certain I"ll never see this.

I also want to add that this would be a much easier discussion if we could actually watch this happen. I do think there are times when a player could go beyond acceptable into unsporting attitude. Level of play also would play a part here. That's why I've been interested in all the responses - there is certainly credence in a number of the different views here.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I also want to add that this would be a much easier discussion if we could actually watch this happen. I do think there are times when a player could go beyond acceptable into unsporting attitude. Level of play also would play a part here. That's why I've been interested in all the responses - there is certainly credence in a number of the different views here.

Ahh, so if I back down a little then you will too?? lol I'll remember that...

Okay, well, I guess I'm see that part that goes beyond acceptable and you're seeing the other possibilities. I've been saying all along that it's gonna depend a little on the situation, level of play, how the different people handle it, etc.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Ahh, so if I back down a little then you will too?? lol I'll remember that...

Okay, well, I guess I'm see that part that goes beyond acceptable and you're seeing the other possibilities. I've been saying all along that it's gonna depend a little on the situation, level of play, how the different people handle it, etc.

Yep, agree with all that!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Okay, let me be sure I understand what you're saying, JR and JR.

It's okay for A1 to dog B1, staying within 6 inches, for an entire two or three hour period, as long as it takes for the game to process, as long as LGP is maintained and there's only incidental contact. That's your stand?

Juulie, with all due respect, I bet it was not as bad as it was made out to be. For one I doubt that a sweaty kid wants to stay that close to another sweaty kid for that period of time. Secondly if a game takes 2 or 3 hours then that is a problem beyond this situation that was being described. And if there are timeouts and quarter breaks, this would not apply either. Let us put this in a little perspective.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

What would you say to B1 if he commented to you that he didn't like it?

Play basketball.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

DO you draw the line at TO's and half-time? If B1 is trying to talk to a teammate, and A1 is hovering, you wouldn't back A1 off?

What rule could I tell the player to back off? Unless there is some contact during this action, there is not much I can do. Now if I know a player is frustrated, I might watch them closer, but I am not calling anything if there is no contact what so ever. I would think if someone was that close, there might be some contact at some point. Then I will address it accordingly.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

So far I'm just asking where you draw the line. But I'm also thinking...

What rule could I tell the player to back off? Unless there is some contact during this action, there is not much I can do. Now if I know a player is frustrated, I might watch them closer, but I am not calling anything if there is no contact what so ever. I would think if someone was that close, there might be some contact at some point. Then I will address it accordingly.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

This wouldn't be legal on the street, it would be stalking. Why is it okay on the bball court?

Running into someone on the street would also not be legal; it might be assault and battery. Do we call assault and battery on a PC foul or an illegal screen? Of course we do not. This situation did not take place o the street. This is in a game that has rules as well. I do not think that analogy is a good one.

Peace

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Juulie, with all due respect, I bet it was not as bad as it was made out to be.

Well, I think that's part of the question. RevRef said it looked to him as though it was intimidation, taunting, etc. You think maybe he's exaggerating? But what if he's not would that change your opinion?

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is in a game that has rules as well. I do not think that analogy is a good one.

It's not an analogy at all. It's a literal question. If I were walking around downtown doing errands, paying bills, buying groceries, etc, and some guy were walking along next to me the whole time, no contact, no verbiage, staying within 6 inches, never letting up, never backing off, well I'd make one of my stops the police station.

Now if I'm playing basketball and the game is going forward, I have agreed that the rules for "personal space" aren't the same, and I'm gonna have to put up with someone dogging me.

But when the game isn't going forward, and there's really nothing for that person to gain in terms of basketball, why are the normal "personal space" rules now suspended?

I'm not arguing as a way to be obnoxious, just sort of exploring a philosophical question.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

What would you say to B1 if he commented to you that he didn't like it?

I cannot think of an example of anything one player does being against the rules because another player does not like it.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I cannot think of an example of anything one player does being against the rules because another player does not like it.

So how would you word that?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Well, I think that's part of the question. RevRef said it looked to him as though it was intimidation, taunting, etc. You think maybe he's exaggerating? But what if he's not would that change your opinion?

When we tell stories about situations we witness, we tend to include things that apart of the story that might not actually be completely true. This is especially true when we are trying to justify our position (I am guilty as anyone in telling stories like this). I also think that the fact that the OPer is a Reverend and you are a compassionate woman also shades your opinions. I am just telling you there is no rule that prohibits this on the surface. You also have to work the game and this is why you get paid the big bucks to make those decisions. But you are not going to change my mind that this is inherently illegal or that something must be done. I guess I would have to be there, but I would guess that based on what games I have been around, this would be hard to accomplish for a team without sacrificing a lot of other things in the process. Essentially you are taking away a player from your team to just cover one player so close. And I really do not know how someone can be that close and not have any contact without bordering on illegal contact.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

It's not an analogy at all. It's a literal question. If I were walking around downtown doing errands, paying bills, buying groceries, etc, and some guy were walking along next to me the whole time, no contact, no verbiage, staying within 6 inches, never letting up, never backing off, well I'd make one of my stops the police station.

Once again that is a bad analogy. Standing that close to someone off the court does not necessarily have a purpose. Guarding a player in a small box (the court) does have a purpose. I do not know if I would be following anyone around that closely (that was not my spouse or significant other) walking on the street, let alone during a game.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Now if I'm playing basketball and the game is going forward, I have agreed that the rules for "personal space" aren't the same, and I'm gonna have to put up with someone dogging me.

Yes, or do not play sports.

Originally Posted by rainmaker

But when the game isn't going forward, and there's really nothing for that person to gain in terms of basketball, why are the normal "personal space" rules now suspended? I have no idea "why." I do know there are not "personal space" rules in the game of basketball. If there were I do not see how you could even play the game at all.

I'm not arguing as a way to be obnoxious, just sort of exploring a philosophical question.

I did not take your comments as arguing. I am just trying to help you see how out of place that thinking is in the context of a sport. I can see football would be a real problem for you then.

Peace

[Rev.Ref63]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That all sounds wonderful, but your logic sounds like something I would expect from a younger, inexperienced, lower level official that has never or rarely gets varsity or college assignments.

Logic is not the issue here. We are asked to make calls based upon clearly stated rules and to exercise our best judgment in interpreting those rules. Had I been working this game, I would have judged that A1 was acting in an unsporting manner and, at the least, had him get out of B1's face. I wasn't working the game so that is a mute point.

I have no idea what your background is in officiating and what you are used to working. But you do not see any people that claim to work high levels saying your ruling makes a lot of sense.

I am 44 yrs old and not a young, immature beginner. I am used to working HS varsity (8 yrs) - no college. Regardless of the level, unsporting conduct should not be allowed.

I have no problem with you asking the question, but to try to justify it with a very shady interpretation is where I have the problem.

I believe that the rule I referenced very clearly supported what would have been my decision had I been working the game.

Standing next to someone is not illegal.

Agreed, and if this was the extent of it, I'd have no problem whatsoever.

And we should not be making calls because a player is frustrated by a legal act.

Agreed again. However, when a player is trying to intimidate another player, it is time to intervene. Had you been there, I'm sure that you would feel the same. The defensive posture taken by A1 was unnecessary an unsporting.

That is not very good officiating in my opinion.

I would say that it would be poor officiating to allow it to this degree. The game was very clearly getting out of hand based upon the atmosphere that this one defender had created.

Peace[/QUOTE]

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

In this case, I'd let him listen. It's just an explanation of the call. If I was having a l'il "heart-to-heart" with a player over something though, I might shoo the other player away and keep the original tete-a-tete just between the two involved parties. JMO.

It was a tater-tot and I did shoo B1 away. I have to admit though that when he said he was there to just listen to what was being said about him I was a bit annoyed.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Well, I think that's part of the question. RevRef said it looked to him as though it was intimidation, taunting, etc. You think maybe he's exaggerating? But what if he's not would that change your opinion?

I tend to agree (if I'm picturing the same thing I think you're describing). If a person is doing this in a dead ball, it's unsportsmanlike. First a talk, then a T. That sort of stuff is the fuel for a fight.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rev.Ref63

Logic is not the issue here. We are asked to make calls based upon clearly stated rules and to exercise our best judgment in interpreting those rules. Had I been working this game, I would have judged that A1 was acting in an unsporting manner and, at the least, had him get out of B1's face. I wasn't working the game so that is a mute point.

And that is a judgment you will just have to make. I bet if a coach complained to your assignor about it or the school assigned the game, they might think your judgment is a stretch. Also what level was this game?

Originally Posted by Rev.Ref63

I am 44 yrs old and not a young, immature beginner. I am used to working HS varsity (8 yrs) - no college. Regardless of the level, unsporting conduct should not be allowed.

Based on what you have just listed, you have not achieved the level of accomplishment to have such a strong opinion about something that is not supported by the rules. And yes, it would matter based on the level as to how your ruling would be accepted. I can name a few varsity coaches that would do everything in their power to not have you work their games if they knew the rules on this issue. I would be careful to say that this applies at all levels. Just an opinion, take it or leave it.

Originally Posted by Rev.Ref63

I believe that the rule I referenced very clearly supported what would have been my decision had I been working the game.

Well it is not me you have to convince. But to say something that is not put in any "official" interpretation or is not even addressed, is not "very clearly supported" if you ask me. And just like a judge in lower court, our decisions are often reviewed and heavily scrutinized. And if you make a ruling that is not supported, it is very likely someone will have a say in the future as to your ability to work similar games in the future.

Originally Posted by Rev.Ref63

Agreed again. However, when a player is trying to intimidate another player, it is time to intervene. Had you been there, I'm sure that you would feel the same. The defensive posture taken by A1 was unnecessary an unsporting.

Standing next to someone is not illegal. And if someone blocks a shot and throws it into the 3rd row, that could be seen as intimidation as well. I would hope you would not call a foul based on the fact a little guard might be afraid of going to the lane based on that intimidation?

Originally Posted by Rev.Ref63

I would say that it would be poor officiating to allow it to this degree. The game was very clearly getting out of hand based upon the atmosphere that this one defender had created.

And I would think it would be very poor to call something only supported by a personal opinion. There is not a single interpretation that even suggests this is illegal. If they change that I would at least go along with you on this. At this time there is no support for that. Basketball is not a love fest. There are things that are going to happen that will not make players happy. That does not make them illegal.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

So how would you word that?

How would you word what?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Rev.Ref63

For me, the NOTE: on 10-3-7-C would be enough to back him up. In my opinion, A1 crossed the line when he was "nose-to-nose" with B1. He was not just "near him" as has been stated; he was literally in his face at all times, similar to how a drill instructor gets in the face of a new recruit. If he'd stuck his tongue out we would have had contact.

He was, IMO, trying to embarrass, ridicule, and demean, the opponent.

RevRef:

If what you are saying is that NFHS R10-S3-A7c trumps NFHS R4-S23 when it comes to playing defense and NFHS R4-S40 when it comes to setting screens, then I suggest that you reread the Sections 23 (guarding) and 40 (screening) of Rule 4. You will see that R10-S3-A7c has nothing to do with these sections. Let A1 play defense and set screens and use R4-S23 and R4-S40 be your guide. The situations that are covered by R10-S3-A7c are far and few between compared with players playing defense and setting screens.

I agree with Rut, your suggested use of R10-S3-A7c suggest to me that you are not a very experienced official in both rules knowledge and application of the rules. That is the observation that you will recieve from many of us bald old geezers that do have that experience and knowledge.

MTD, Sr.

P.S. Go BROWNS!!