Blocked shot with contact

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is untrue. It is untrue on many levels and it is untrue because there are many examples of people being pushed out, you just have not been around likely to know many of the stories. And they are not pushed out just because the assignor wanted them out; they are pushed out because the coaches and administrators that hire the assignors push them out. But if the coaches and administrators are happy to have the older official that has been through the fire, they will stick around.



This is completely untrue. In the last 8 or so years I have worked older officials have retired or they have in some cases died and there have been a bunch of newer, younger, athletic officials that have been hired. I am only in my mid-30s but I have worked with many guys that are younger than me lately and they were recently picked up in conferences where assignors have been around. I am very rarely working with the "old guard" as much anymore as I used to. And I have been fired from leagues along with many others when we either disagree with the assignor or we have a game where a coach complains and we get the boot. And there have been state final officials that have gotten the boot in Chicago for not calling the game a certain way or because of some controversy.



Then again, that is an opinion and you have every right to that opinion. But your opininon and my opinion does not count. I can tell you this, unless your prove you are have as competent, you are not going to push many out of their positions. The coaches would not allow it. Bottom line is the coaches would rather have a guy they know how that person is going to handle a situation, then a guy they have never seen, do not know how he will handle pressure to make a call or if the other coach can get under your skull. Assignors ultimatlely work for the schools and the coaches. If they put a rookie on a game and the coach does not like that rookie, the assignor is not going to keep giving the rookie games at that school. It is just not going to happen. And frankly, when I watch younger officials, I do not see a lot of guys that I want to work with in a tough game and I have to constantly save you. I like working with guys that can stand on their own two feet and I will help out if you need it in a real pinch. Assignors are looking for Referees, not U2s.



You are right. Because the vast majority of officials that I come in contact with that claim the "ole boy network" system as the reason they do not get a shot, usually those are officials that I do not know if they could handle a good JV or Sophomore game. And when I was advancing in this system, 3 man was not even the games I was offered.



When I move up to the Chicago area the first thing I did was look at a map, figure out where I was willing to drive and called or contacted every assignor I could to see what camps they ran or were associated with and I tried to attend as many of those camps as possible. I already have varsity experience so all I had to do was showcase my ability. After the summer I did this, I was hired off the bat by two assignors to varsity games. I was even told in one of them that I had to prove to some coaches I could work. I even called a T in one of the games I worked in one of the conferences (2 man with a veteran officials). The coach was apparently impressed with me even though I called the T on his player and I got more games in that conference the following year. I was even observed by other officials that recognized my talent and had me work with them directly in games or gave me opportunities I would not have had. I had a sales background even then so I knew how to tell people about my experience and I would ask direct questions to see what I had to do. Every assignor that I currently work for in the Chicago area either saw me at a camp, or received recommendations by the right official that watched me work in front of them (varsity tournament) or saw me at another camp. Then when I showed up to a particular camp, I was observed and in most cases hired for varsity on the spot. I do not say this to brag, but I had the same information at my disposal as anyone else. Most assignors were listed in many association books and their contact information was public. All I had to do was contact the people, listen to what they expected and usually attended camps where they could see what I was about for themselves.

I also have another little secret for you. Many of the assignors do not like each other or respect the other decisions or their staffs. And you are not going to get 20 games from one assignor usually. Most are going to give you 3 to 4 games at most and if you get more you were available or lucky that others were closed and you were on the list. So if you are going to work a full varsity schedule, chances are you will have to work for many people and that is not going to happen because you think you are good and they will just hire you.

Peace

Little late on the reply,work, family and Christmas got in the way.

I told you we wouldn't agree It most certainly does exist and our frame of references are disparate, It's a matter of what degree. Does it permeate the system? No, but it does exist.

Believe as you wish. If this was a ruling conundrum we could arrive at the correct answer. I respect your opinion.

Not much of a secret regarding assignors at least from my dealings. You're further down the road than I am, but I had the lay of the land my first year.

Happy New Year!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by fullor30

Little late on the reply,work, family and Christmas got in the way.

I told you we wouldn't agree It most certainly does exist and our frame of references are disparate, It's a matter of what degree. Does it permeate the system? No, but it does exist.

I never stated there was not some kind of political structure in place. I am just saying it is not the end all be all of assigning. And just like anything if you do not understand the system you are working in, you will likely not be very successful. You always need to know the "do's and don'ts" of any system. We definitely have them, but they are not things most officials cannot easily overcome.

Originally Posted by fullor30

Believe as you wish. If this was a ruling conundrum we could arrive at the correct answer. I respect your opinion.

Not much of a secret regarding assignors at least from my dealings. You're further down the road than I am, but I had the lay of the land my first year.

Happy New Year!

Do not assume disagreement with disrespect. We both have different experiences and that shapes many people's opinions on just about anything we talk about here. I just think just like anything the longer you do something, the more you understand the ins and outs of this situation. I did not understand much of anything about the systems I have been in after the first few years. Hell, I have learned things in the past couple of years I did not realize for almost 10 years. But we can talk about this further at another time and off this site. There are a lot of things people do not realize until you talk to certain "in the know" people (and at the right time).

You also have a good New Year and have a blessed New Year as well.

Peace

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I never stated there was not some kind of political structure in place. I am just saying it is not the end all be all of assigning. And just like anything if you do not understand the system you are working in, you will likely not be very successful. You always need to know the "do's and don'ts" of any system. We definitely have them, but they are not things most officials cannot easily overcome.



Do not assume disagreement with disrespect. We both have different experiences and that shapes many people's opinions on just about anything we talk about here. I just think just like anything the longer you do something, the more you understand the ins and outs of this situation. I did not understand much of anything about the systems I have been in after the first few years. Hell, I have learned things in the past couple of years I did not realize for almost 10 years. But we can talk about this further at another time and off this site. There are a lot of things people do not realize until you talk to certain "in the know" people (and at the right time).

You also have a good New Year and have a blessed New Year as well.

Peace

Glad we could meet in the middle on this, When I bump into you down the road(probably you correcting me at a clinic!! ) we can chat.....

[Jimgolf]

Jeff, are you saying that when a defender jumps into a shooter and makes contact with the body, you don't have a foul unless the contact is flagrant?

Or do you mean when the defender jumps straight up, you don't have a foul on body contact?

If the defender is jumping into a shooter and makes body contact, the arm contact is relatively inconsequential. The shooter is likely to miss whether the shot is blocked or not.

However, if the defender is jumping straight up, the shooter is really responsible for the body contact.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

Jeff, are you saying that when a defender jumps into a shooter and makes contact with the body, you don't have a foul unless the contact is flagrant?

Or do you mean when the defender jumps straight up, you don't have a foul on body contact?

If the defender is jumping into a shooter and makes body contact, the arm contact is relatively inconsequential. The shooter is likely to miss whether the shot is blocked or not.

However, if the defender is jumping straight up, the shooter is really responsible for the body contact.

Just because there is body contact does not constitute there is a foul period. And it is not my job to "protect the shooter." And when the defender clearly blocks the ball without contact, then contact occurs I am not calling a foul to "protect the shooter." Incidental contact rules are very clear and I have no problem letting contact go in these situations.

Peace

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Just because there is body contact does not constitute there is a foul period. And it is not my job to "protect the shooter." And when the defender clearly blocks the ball without contact, then contact occurs I am not calling a foul to "protect the shooter." Incidental contact rules are very clear and I have no problem letting contact go in these situations.

Peace

Rut:

At the H.S. level, if B1 cannot block A1's shot without making contact with the B1, B1 has fouled A1. I am sorry, but blocking the shot before having contact does not give B1 a free pass. Jumping to block A1's shot is just part of B1's defensive responsibilities. B1 must also be able to do it without contacting A1 after the block, such as return to the playing surface or not hitting A1's arm or body. If B1 cannot do that then he has committed a foul against A1.

And that goes for the college game too. We officials are the problem in this situation. Just like the fans we see the great block and then forget that the defender has to complete his responsibilities without fouling. Everybody is screaming great block and then the defender hits the shooter's arm and lands on the shooter. We has officials have to do our job and see the whole play, NOT just the block.

MTD, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Rut:

At the H.S. level, if B1 cannot block A1's shot without making contact with the B1, B1 has fouled A1. I am sorry, but blocking the shot before having contact does not give B1 a free pass. Jumping to block A1's shot is just part of B1's defensive responsibilities. B1 must also be able to do it without contacting A1 after the block, such as return to the playing surface or not hitting A1's arm or body. If B1 cannot do that then he has committed a foul against A1.

And that goes for the college game too. We officials are the problem in this situation. Just like the fans we see the great block and then forget that the defender has to complete his responsibilities without fouling. Everybody is screaming great block and then the defender hits the shooter's arm and lands on the shooter. We has officials have to do our job and see the whole play, NOT just the block.

MTD, Sr.

I disagree with you. And it appears that Hank Nichols disagrees with you as well. Because he put out many bulletins over the years or had plays on the tape that told officials not to call fouls just because there was contact with the defender and shooter. The NCAA showed several tapes where officials called fouls on defenders and they were doing nothing.

I also never said, "free pass." That is not even terminology that I would even use. And contact on blocked shots is inevitable; you have to decide if that contact is illegal. I tend to pass on contact just because there is contact and consider it a foul in these situations.

And I also find it so funny that officials get so caught up in what is illegal when it comes to the shooter, but officials allow all kinds of illegal acts throughout the game, but if you touch the shooter that just goes too far. The airborne shooter rule is so sacred that officials allow all kinds of illegal contact on dribblers, rebounding and screens, but touch the shooter and we have to call something. I find that logic a little odd.

Peace