End of game "let them play"
 

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?

I"m not a guy, and I'm on leave of absence this year, but I'm glad to answer your question. I don't. Sometimes, in a blow-out, at a lower level of play, I'll sort of "redefine" some of the violations a tiny bit, and I"ll lean a little more heavily on A/D for fouls. But these are very minor adjustments, and I certainly don't let anything obvious go. especially a close good game.

Generally, I officiate the 1st quarter the same as the 4th.

I only change things up a bit for odd situations such:

• one team hasn't scored yet
• I need to change the point spread so that my bet on the game wins

Part Of Pregame Conference
 

Last Two Minutes
Near the end of the game, be aware of coaches calling time-outs and be sure to inform them after they have used
all their time outs. We’re not calling anything in the last two minutes if we haven’t already called it earlier in the game, unless it’s
so blatant that it can’t be ignored. We don’t want our first illegal screen to be called with 30 seconds left in
the game; but if the illegal screen puts a player into the first row of the bleachers, then we have to call it.
Let’s not put the whistles away in the last two minutes: That wouldn’t be consistent with the way we’ve been
calling the game. If the game dictates it, let the players win or lose the game at the line. We don’t want to be
the ones who decide the game by ignoring obvious fouls just to get the game over.
End of game strategic fouls: If the winning team is just holding the ball and is willing to take the free throws,
then let’s call the foul immediately, so the ballhandler doesn’t get hit harder to draw a whistle. Let’s make
sure there is a play on the ball by the defense. If there’s no play on the ball, if the defense grabs the jersey
from behind, or if the ballhandler receives a bear hug, we should consider an intentional foul. These are not
basketball plays and should be penalized as intentional.

Not funny.

You don't change the way you call, but you do those things differently? :confused:

I do adjust the way I call, but not very much change and not very often.

So the only time you call something that's blatant is in the last two minutes? Huh? :confused:

... unless he called it earlier in the game? like he said? in his post?? hello??

A close game, no way. We're working hard to make sure we're consistent with what we've called all game and trying hard not to miss anything.

In a blowout game that just needs to end, especially the last two minutes...as long as the game stays under control, I'm gonna swallow my whistle some. I'm not going to "let 'em play," which is usually code for letting them beat the hell out of each other. But I'm going to limit "game interrupters" to only what absolutely must be called.

Had a newer guy work with me last weekend, and on the ride hime he mentioned a previous game where his partner called a late foul he disagreed with. He then proceeded to mention his end-of-game-let-them-play theory. Our other partner and I quickly shot that down. My thought, which I've probably plagiarized from here:
If you let a foul go that you've been calling all game, just because you don't want to decide the game as an official, you've decided the game with your inaction.

We look at it the other way and try to be consistent so what's a foul in the 1st Qtr is a foul in the 4th Qtr. If there is enough contact that we blow a whistle in the early part of a game - that same contact should bring a whistle with 1 minute remaining. I believe that if you don't call a game this way you are inviting trouble. Play becomes rough and thats when officials think they suddenly have to "clamp down". If they would call the game consistently - the players would adjust.

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.

Better? :)

I do not believe you officiate that way.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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)

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. :D

A couple of us knew what you meant to say. ;)

yea, I was watching Star Trek re-runs yesterday:o

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?

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

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.

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.

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.

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. ;)

Yikes!! Well, I"m batting about 05% today. Guess I'll quit expounding. I did get the part about Star Trek yesterday right. ChessRef, it wasn't Data, though. It was Janeway and Chakotay.

So which Season 7 didn't you like, Scrappy? Voyager? TNG? DS9? or the original:eek: ?

I guess I just don't get it (so what's new?). I was taught to make the same call on the same type of play the same way from start to finish. If there hasn't been a 3 second call all game because it hasn't happened, and then it happens in the last minute of a close game, I'm going to call it because that's the rule. I'm not going to not call it because it wasn't "blatant". If I don't call it, I'm not being fair to the team on defense.

Remember, every time you give one team a break, you're penalizing the other team.

I hear a lot of spectators/parents/fans saying stuff like "let the players decide the game"... well, if your player has slow feet and needs to use two hands to try to keep the offense player from getting to the basket, that player is deciding the game by fouling. Letting it go would be not allowing the offense from deciding the game by making his freethrows. If hand-checking and rough defensive pressure is allowed in the first half, why call ticky tack touch fouls at the end of the game because one team now wants to foul due to strategy? I wanted to fouls to be called in the first half due to strategy (get fouled, make freethrows)... I say let them play, but calling fouls and shooting freethrows are part of letting them play...

unless you deem calling fouls in the first half intentionally not letting them play...

Let Them Play! Let Them Play! Let Them Play!! Why does this remind me of Mike and Kelly Leak in the Houston Astrodome, then little Tanner Boyle making the security guards look stupid.. :D

The original didn't go 7 seasons. :)

Sometimes, "letting them play" is heard due to the fact:

That one team in more physical and less skilled than another team (i.e., football players playing basktball against basketball player).
That the game is being called too tight by newer/younger officials.
That the teams are overly and illegally agressive, the teams are lacking skills and the game is already in the toilet so everyone wants to go home.

Sorry I am a little late to the party.
 

I am of the mindset that if you call things early that are blatant, you will not have to call many of those things later in the game. Usually that means I do not have to ignore much of anything. Or if I call something late, chances are we have called something similar earlier in the game and that call will be accepted on many levels.

Also understand that players tend to get out of control or are more aggressive at the end of the game as well. And often times people are just flying around and calling something at the end is more difficult.

Peace

If it's a foul the first minute, it's a foul the last minute.

The player that commits the foul or violation did decide the game.

This makes a great little sound bite. But as a mindset, it is really off-base. While we shouldn't set out to ignore fouls and violations, we shouldn't be in the business of looking for ways to give the other team the ball.

You know he's not saying that, BITS, but the clarification might be helpful for some readers.

From my personal experience and observations, the vast majority of new officials let way too much go. I include myself in that majority.

In my area we get alot of "football" schools and they will mug the other team till you stop it. They have lots of heart and muscle but minimal talent.

I don't think Padgett was advising one way or another, I believe he was just wanting folks new be aware that once we deviate from the rules which advantages one team, then we are creating an equal and opposite disadvantage toward the opponent. I don't think it's even a 1/2-step off base.

I agree with regard to new/rookie refs that it's hard to put air in the Fox.
I used newer/younger to describe 2-4 year officials that are starting to get into their books and are now soaking up "all the information" (knowing all the rules), but have not yet become familiar with incidental contact and flow interupters that don't need to be called. ;)

I called the first (and only) FT violation of the night last night with 2:30 to play. Does that make me a bad person? Or would that only be if it happened 31 seconds later?

Sometimes the players give you no choice, ...as long as the player clearly violated, ... blatantly, yer good. :)

Hey I resemble that remark.

Though in my defense I have made great strides with incidential contact and not being the game interrupter guy. But I still have my moments.;)

Ah, but yer ahead of the game, because you recognize it and cuz yer Here ! :)

Thanks, Mick. Take a cookie out of petty cash. :)

I once gave a warning, then a technical foul, to a defender for leaning over the line up to his armpit on a throw in with one second left in a one point game. The offended school called my assignor to complain, saying that I cost them a chance to win the game, even though this school did not even use our association. First, about their "chance to win the game." The game had seemed out of reach, a double digit lead in the last 3 minutes. Then the visitors made a couple of steals and threw in a couple of shots, including a 3 with less than 5 seconds. The throw in was deflected out of bounds near the division line with 1 second on the clock. A 6'5" guy is defending with his hand right over the thrower's head. I felt that I had no choice. If I don't make this call, I'm giving the school in question the only small chance they might have had by forcing a 5 second count or a turnover. The coach told me later that the kid did not even know what the technical was for. (YOU'RE HIS COACH, TEACH HIM THE RULES!)
This was about 4 years ago. A couple of weeks ago, I was at this same school. We were discussing various rules, including this one. There was a guy there, who was an assistant coach when this thing happened, I think. He commented that it was "....chicken to call this in the last minute when it hadn't been called the whole game." I don't know if he knew he was talking to the offender or not. I said nothing, but thought, as loudly as I could, "Guess what, nutball, the play had not occurred to be called until the last minute!"

Having said all this, I agree with Rainmaker's philosophy of adjustment at the end of a blowout at lower levels. The exception to this is a varsity boys game that the outcome has been decided and the players still have issues to settle among themselves. Often guys don't care if they foul out, so the play gets more physical, so we must protect them from each other. Then they start releasing early looking for dunks, and their is great potential for one to land on his head.

No. I realizing he's not saying that. But occassionally I run across the odd official who takes this philosophy too literally. An official who calls fouls that should be passed on because, "By not calling it I'm depriving the other team of getting to the bonus." Our decision making should be restricted to was it a foul/violation or wasn't it. We can't get into the realm of analyzing how not calling something would negatively impact the other team.

See everything; call what matters. Not See everything; and call it because if you don't the other team won't benefit from the strict application of the rules.

http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/mu.../300px-067.jpg

Me like cookies, cuz cookies is so "yum"!

Yup, I agree with that.

Now, could you explain how you can advocate the exact opposite in another thread? You know, the one where you think that it's good "game management" to even up fouls.

There is no thread where I have advocated evening up fouls. I have never suggested that if there are 10 fouls on one team there should be 10 on the other. Unless, of course, you have a different definition of evening them up.

The one thing that is lacking in this thread is the following simple philosophy: make calls that fit the game. In other words, don't change the way you've called the game for 30 minutes in the last 2 minutes. If you've let the game be physical and let the guards use their hands all game, then you call a handcheck at a critical time in a close game, you're gonna get in trouble because you've now changed the way you're calling the game. Same thing on illegal picks, palming and stuff like that, if you've let borderline plays go early on, you almost have to continue to stay on that side at the end of the game because that's the game the players and coaches have adapted to. I think the bottom line, that a lot of people are missing is that it's not necessarily the last 2 minutes that get you in trouble, it's the rest of the game that sets it all up. If you do a poor job for 30 minutes, you cannot try to make it up in 2 minutes. This doesn't mean "let them play" in the last 2 minutes, it means call the game that you've established and don't change it at the end.

In regards to the T situation that was described, I think you should consider what you could've done differently to avoid a T in a one point game for violating the plane. You could give the warning loudly and clearly, have it announced and make sure the player knows before the inbounds play. If nobody knows why the T was called, in my opinion, you as an official did not manage the situation well. By rule correct, but not necessarily right. Make sure that everybody in the gym knows what happened and why it happened when you call that T in that situation. Just my opinion, but I think it'll save a lot of grief.

well said

Perhaps I did not adequately describe the play. The whole thing took place right in front of the bench of the team that got the T. I blew my whistle, announced the warning to both benches and the table, and it was properly recorded. I actually expected the coach to complain about the warning, but he didn't. On the contrary, he nodded and said quite calmly, "Yep, that's right." But, seconds later, when his player did the exact same thing, the T was called and the bench came unglued. The reason: "You just don't call that." The reason the player did not know what had been called was not because of lack of clarity on the warning, but because he had never heard of the rule, because nobody calls it around here.

Well in that case, nice job, you did all you could.

Missing? :confused: That's exactly what I said on the first page of the thread.

I will call the game the same all the way through unless its getting too physical, in which case I will tighten up.

Well, you are not changing your game, if you tighten up a little on the front end of the contest. Then, the calls for getting too physical won't surprise anyone on the back end of the contest.

Point taken. :o

Happened a few weeks ago. Championship game of a tournament, score is close throughout the whole game. Intense game, but well played, very few fouls committed by either team. With 7 seconds left, team A down by 1, A1 pulls up at the freethrow line for a potential game winning jumper. B1 slides over but is too late to make a defensive play, so he punches A1 in the stomach. Newbie official calls a foul, but veteran ref comes over to over rule his call: "listen, it's a close game, we gotta let them play. We haven't called this all game, so we can't call it now with 7 seconds left. We gotta let the players decide the outcome of the game." They go with an Inadvertant Whistle, team A retains possession of the ball. A2 is trying to inbound the ball on the sideline and steps over the line. Newbie official calls a violation, but again, veteran ref over rules the call: "listen, it's a close game, we gotta let them play. We haven't called this all game, so we can't call it now with 5 seconds left. We gotta let the players decide the outcome of the game." Inadvertant Whistle, team A possession. Inbound pass, A3 is fouled and is on the line for a one and one. He misses the first freethrow, but knowing the shot will be short, he sprints across the FT line before the ball contacts the rim and gets his own rebound, scores as the buzzer goes off. Team B coach is screaming about the FT violation, veteran ref tells coach: "listen, it's a close game, we gotta let them play. We haven't called this all game, so we can't call it now with 2 seconds left. We gotta let the players decide the outcome of the game."

True story...

more like a horror story! :eek: :(

Wow unreal...goes to show it's not the number of games that you have worked that makes you a good official..that is brutal - what level is this?

This can't possibly be true. He's gotta be trying to make a point.

I would hope not, but you never know...I know several "veteran" officials who haven't worked above 8th grade in 20 years, I could see a few of them doing this...

Does this guy work for streets and sanitation in Chicago? Sounds like he's just grabbing a paycheck and going throught the motions. Sad

Koach has a habit of spinning wildly far-fetched tales, ending with "True story" in order to make a point. I fell for it last time.

http://forum.officiating.com/showpos...0&postcount=42

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me 14 more times in the same day, well, that's probably normal, too, actually.

Ahh ok, I have been duly warned..thanks Scraps..

Did a two game set last night, 7th and 8th grade girls and partner, although a good guy, is the laziest ref I know. Refuses to switch or move to other side of court. I made him move a few times by keeping my head down as I ran cross court to inbound on opposite end of baseline to become the new trail and never gave him a peek.

Would tweet whistle with no signals other than a cursory wave of direction, if I was lucky, on out of bounds plays.

Makes for a long evening if partners aren't into it.

FWIW, IMHO, "I let them play at the end of the game" is a euphemism for "I'm afraid to make a controversial call, even if I'm right."

I generally force the switch, most of "them" will go with it.