End of game "let them play"

[gordon30307]

Originally Posted by ABO77

At the end of a game a commonly heard philosophy is to "let the guys play". Just wondering if you guys change the way you call the game at the end...esp a close good game?

Blow out games. I might accidentally on purpose miss some violations ( not the obvious ones only the ones I saw but noone else did) but I will get the fouls (I'll let some go perhaps a push that interrupted a dribble but poession has not changed.) especially if there are bodies on the floor. Concerning close games what's a foul or violation in the first quarter is a foul or violation in the fourth quarter.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I absolutely do. You think the first 3-seconds call of the night is going to be in the last 45 seconds of a 4 point game? No way -- unless it's blatant. He's been in there for 5 seconds and ignored a couple warnings and then gets the pass.

You think I'm calling the first illegal screen of the game in the last 2 minutes? No way. We've clearly let the borderline screens go all game. I'm going to call one now? Uh-uh. If there's a blatant illegal screen that bumps a guy 5 feet off the court to free up the shooter, then I'm grabbing that one.

So if there is an illegal screen that doesn't bump the guy 5 feet off the court, but it frees the ball-handler up enough to score and put Team A up with less then a minute, you're not making that call? Or the arm-bar or hand/hands on the dribbler causing him not to make his move to the basket, you're not making that call in the last minute either?? I ask because I'm taking your definition of "blatant" as the harshness of the contact or the extensiveness of the violation, versus, the "blatant" or "OBVIOUS" foul or violation. If your definition is the latter, then I agree, and an illegal screen to gain an OBVIOUS advantage at the end of the game should be called, as well as the camping in the lane to jockey for the tip-in to take a lead with less then a minute.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

We're always going to make a call on a blatant foul. But there are some calls that we're NOT going to make in the last two minutes -- unless they're blatant.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I absolutely do. You think the first 3-seconds call of the night is going to be in the last 45 seconds of a 4 point game? No way -- unless it's blatant. He's been in there for 5 seconds and ignored a couple warnings and then gets the pass.

You think I'm calling the first illegal screen of the game in the last 2 minutes? No way. We've clearly let the borderline screens go all game. I'm going to call one now? Uh-uh. If there's a blatant illegal screen that bumps a guy 5 feet off the court to free up the shooter, then I'm grabbing that one.

In these two examples, both would have been made for the first time in the last 2 minutes during the game. The OP was about letting them play and changing the quality of the calls. I do not believe you change the quality of your calls, but I do believe you may not start calling something new in the last couple/few minutes unless they are blatant.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

So if there is an illegal screen that doesn't bump the guy 5 feet off the court, but it frees the ball-handler up enough to score and put Team A up with less then a minute, you're not making that call? .

The OP specifically talked about a blow-out, not a game where a score puts one team up when it wasn't before the shot. In a close game, it should be called consistently on the tight end of the narrow flexibility continuum all through the game. In a game with one clear victor, it should be called consistently on the lighter end of that continuum. Unless there are sportsmanship issues.

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by mick

In these two examples, both would have been made for the first time in the last 2 minutes during the game. The OP was about letting them play and changing the quality of the calls. I do not believe you change the quality of your calls, but I do believe you may not start calling something new in the last couple/few minutes unless they are blatant.

I totally agree with this, and in the last minute or two, if you're the R you should be bringing your crew together the first timeout you get and state this.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by mick

In these two examples, both would have been made for the first time in the last 2 minutes during the game.

That is correct. That is exactly what I said in my reply to Mark Padgett. But then you said you didn't believe I'd officiate that way. We will ALWAYS call the blatant stuff. But some stuff, especially in the last two minutes, will ONLY get called if it's blatant.

I do believe you may not start calling something new in the last couple/few minutes unless they are blatant.

I believe that's what I've been saying all along. (Or trying to say, anyway)

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

The OP specifically talked about a blow-out, not a game where a score puts one team up when it wasn't before the shot. In a close game, it should be called consistently on the tight end of the narrow flexibility continuum all through the game. In a game with one clear victor, it should be called consistently on the lighter end of that continuum. Unless there are sportsmanship issues.

Thank you.

My post was specific to Scrapper's post of the blatancy of his calls late in the game.

But I totally agree to your philosophy and furthermore, with the exception of your post, the last time I heard or read the word "continuum" space-time preceded it.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

That is correct. That is exactly what I said in my reply to Mark Padgett. But then you said you didn't believe I'd officiate that way. We will ALWAYS call the blatant stuff. But some stuff, especially in the last two minutes, will ONLY get called if it's blatant.

I believe that's what I've been saying all along. (Or trying to say, anyway)

A couple of us knew what you meant to say.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

Thank you.

My post was specific to Scrapper's post of the blatancy of his calls late in the game.

But I totally agree to your philosophy and furthermore, with the exception of your post, the last time I heard or read the word "continuum" space-time preceded it.

yea, I was watching Star Trek re-runs yesterday

[mick]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

The OP specifically talked about a blow-out, not a game where a score puts one team up when it wasn't before the shot. In a close game, it should be called consistently on the tight end of the narrow flexibility continuum all through the game. In a game with one clear victor, it should be called consistently on the lighter end of that continuum. Unless there are sportsmanship issues.

Nope. Didn't.

Originally Posted by ABO77
At the end of a game a commonly heard philosophy is to "let the guys play". Just wondering if you guys change the way you call the game at the end...esp a close good game?

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

yea, I was watching Star Trek re-runs yesterday

I never feel embarrassed for a day with Data and the gang.

[daveg144]

As others have said, a lot depends on the game situation. In a close game, you've got to be consistent all night with what you're calling. In a blowout, I'm going to lean a little bit with the team that's getting badly beaten. In other words, if team A has a 20 point lead in the second half and there's a 50/50 block/charge, I'm going to favor team B. If it's a no doubter, then we make the correct call. I'll also make team A play through a little more contact before I call a foul. Again, not blatantly ignoring obvious fouls, I'm just looking for a few little things that might help soften a bad night for a team that's getting drilled.

Once again, I can't say firmly enough that this does not mean I'm not calling obvious fouls and violations on team B.

In a close game, if we don't have an illegal screen until the last 2 minutes, and it's a no-brainer call (guy moves 3 feet to put a shoulder or leg into the defender) I'm calling it.

Hope this helps a little.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Chess Ref

I never feel embarrassed for a day with Data and the gang.

I don't know. A couple of those Season 7 episodes were really really bad. Fortunately, that last season was salvaged with a really really good series finale.

[Rizzo21]

Fans, you gotta love 'em!

Last night, boys JV, blowout game, final 30 seconds, it's all-sub time. Rebound secured by losing team player who is holding it kind of high, a guy comes from behind and grabs the ball with some body contact. "Over the back", "over the back" is all I hear from some guy behind me. My partner whistles held ball and the guy gets even louder. Like we want to go to the line for two shots (double bonus was on) and hold up the end of the game even longer. It was probably his kid. Don't totally blame him. I suppose when you are getting waxed and the outcome is not in doubt, you want any little scrap of "justice" you can get.

Frankly at the 2-3 minute range with the ends of the benches in, we were sending some guys to the line who probably hadn't scored much, if at all, for the year (you can tell by the team/crowd reactions) and they were getting some points. Nice to see but you can't go overboard either.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Rizzo21

Fans, you gotta love 'em!

Last night, boys JV, blowout game, final 30 seconds, it's all-sub time. Rebound secured by losing team player who is holding it kind of high, a guy comes from behind and grabs the ball with some body contact. "Over the back", "over the back" is all I hear from some guy behind me. My partner whistles held ball and the guy gets even louder. Like we want to go to the line for two shots (double bonus was on) and hold up the end of the game even longer. It was probably his kid. Don't totally blame him. I suppose when you are getting waxed and the outcome is not in doubt, you want any little scrap of "justice" you can get.

I dunno. That sounds like a pretty good place to call the contact. Sub-against-sub was probably a little sloppy, and both kids get their name in the local paper box score.