"Doing it right" vs. OOO

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

There's been a couple of threads recently that have prompted me to ask how people determine the difference between doing the right way, according to the rules, and still not be an "Overly Officious Official". I know this has to be a confusing thing for a new official; heck, I'm still trying to sort it out after all these years.

Be careful about the accusations of being an OOO on this board. What some readers/posters fail to realize, and find satisfaction in ridiculing, is that some people learn the basics and the middle-of-the-road situations by doing thought experiments at the boundaries of the rules....all without ever suggesting that they think such an extreme case is even likely to ever happen or that they would actually call it. It's a method of learning, not a query asking for support of a once in a million call. Some people find that, by fully and completely understanding the extremes of a the rules, they can then know where the reasonable, and sensible, appication of the rule lies.

Also, the presentation of absurd situations are not really an attempt to know what to do when such a situation occurs but are either a way to isolate a very specific issue from all other possibilities, or a way to isolate the intersection of two or more rules to understand how the two rules interact with each other. Again, these are learning tools and methods, not real world examples.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

For example, determining the OOB spot on a throw-in. Scrapper corrected my triangle picture, and he is right. But I've never gotten in trouble for putting the ball at the wrong spot, unless I totally blew the call. I think most would agree that putting the ball at the proper spot is important. But on the other end of the spectrum are the officials that tomegun will be working with - they probably feel the ball needs to be OOB, who cares if it's at the "exact, pin-point placement"? If you continue to put it at the proper spot, instead of occasionally at the "easiest" spot, are you being an OOO? How do you explain to someone that, in this case, they are lazy and you are "doing it right"?

Personally, I put it in at the "correct" spot almost exclusively.

On a few occasstions I may not. For example.... on a backcourt endline throwin with the entire defense racing down the court to set up in a half court defense, I just might take the easier side of the lane if I'm alreay there and the "correct" spot was just outside the lane on the other side.....why force my partner to switch (it's more of an impact on the new lead than me as the new trail) and delay the game with everyone looking at us when there is absolutely no benefit to either team either way. Note that I'm not suggesting a dramatic difference...just one side of the backcourt endline to the other.

Now, in the frontcourt, or under pressure in the backcourt, I'm taking it to the absolute correct spot all the time....even if it forces my parter to walk all the way across the court and we have to wait for them. In those situations, it matter.

That said, I have not problem with putting it in the "correct" spot EVERY time if that is what my partner wishes. I would never consider that overly officious.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Which then brings up the other situation, where the officials saw the removal of the jerseys after the game and called the T's. Why is the general consensus that the officials were OOO's, even though what they did was perfectly within the rules. How do you argue the point if they say they are "doing it right", while the officials that high-tail it out of there as quickly as possible are the lazy ones?

The big leap being made in that thread was that the offiicals lingered on the floor too long. There is no indication of that. There will always be those that will suggest that these were lessor officials having called it rather than consider that the players may have made it impossible for the officials to ignore. Perhaps the official still had his hands in the air for the 3-point try when the shirts were coming off right in front of him....as the buzzer was still sounding.

The points are still valid about getting out of dodge when business is done, but count how many people assumed the refs didn't vs. how many considered that they sufficiently quick.

I don't know if this particular case was well handled or not...did the officials leave promptly or hang around. Was it OO or was it necesary? I don't know. It could have been either. For anyone on here to assert one way or the other without seeing it or knowing the exact timing of the events is making an unfounded conclusion.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I'm not trying to argue each situation; that should be left for those individual threads. I'm just trying to find out how others draw the line, and how they would explain that to newer officials. Granted, there is probably a bit of "local" influence on that line, but I would think there is still a line somewhere.