If you are the R

[TheOracle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Actually, Jeff, he said both. Here's his quote again:
He clearly claims that his high school experience was coaches and ADs having 100% of the say in post season officiating assignments.

Although we can always play games, look on Page 38 on this handbook for one of the high school leagues where I used to work. The officials association assigns officials for tournament game per input from the coaches involved. One coach picks one, the other coach picks the other. While I am certain that you will find exceptions to this in other areas, it is accepted at HS and college levels that coaches and AD's have virtually full control with respect to who works their games. HS State and NCAA tournaments may have different bodies for those specific events, but even for D-1 non-conference games the schools have the input per the game contracts.

http://www.seattleschools.org/area/a...ndbook0405.pdf

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Are you really telling me that you aren't ready to handle the situation when the bench tells you that a player has five fouls if you didn't already know that they had four? Bull pucky! You'd handle it exactly the same way whether you knew or you didn't know. And if the scorer has made a mistake on the foul count somewhere, it will show up on the fourth or the fifth foul anyway, so you're gonna have to deal with it-no matter what.

Some information is useful and I never have said any thing differently. That particular bit of information about a player having four fouls just isn't useful though imho.

Of course I'm not saying that...but I have been in games where that horn and "That's five on 42" caught me completely by surprise. I don't like that kind of surprise in my games...can you tell me why knowing/being aware that players have four fouls is a BAD thing??? I don't think you can (other than saying it affects the way someone calls the game, but I've already said it doesn't for me so you can't say that again so nyah-nyah). It's an opinion thing, and you know what they say about opinions!

[just another ref]

If I am not mistaken Juggling Ref is the only one who said he likes to be notified by the table when a player has 4 fouls. The theory is that he will be prepared when the player picks up his 5th, and will not accidentally allow this disqualified player to remain in the game. He assures us that this information has no effect on the call itself. Fine, I take his word for all this and admire his good intention to go above and beyond and get everything right. First, what level of ball are we talking about here? You refer a couple of times to kids or teenagers as the scorekeepers. And here was the part that I found interesting:

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I found that there was a high number of cases (in my mind) where the ball would be put back into play with the fouling player with 5 fouls but this fact was not mentioned to the officials during the reporting phase. Instead, the 5th-foul information reached the officials during a later stoppage in play (not necessarily the next stoppage, but it often was), or worse: a buzzer sounded during a live ball.

Originally Posted by NevadaRef

Seriously, if you want to keep track of the player fouls on your own for game awareness that's fine, but please don't involve the table crew.

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Meh, it works for me and I've yet to see a table crew that can't handle the task. I am basically reminding them of the importance of passing this information to me.

Are you saying that you have yet to see the crew that can't handle the task of notifying about the 4th foul, yet you have seen a "high number of cases" where they failed to notify you of the 5th? Or did I take something out of context?
__________________

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TD21

If you don't want to go to camp and learn the 2007 way of doing things then don't! But don't sit here and tell me what is right and what is wrong. If you want me to back up my claims with facts, back up yours. I'm waiting.

News flash. I never claim anything like "college and above" to back up my own personal opinion. I don't believe in it. Resumes don't mean squat to me. And I've always found that most people that feel the need to cite their own resumes either don't really possess those credentials anyway.... or they don't have a clue.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Sorry, I have to agree with Rocky.

Know the time on the game clock and the shot clock. Know which way the arrow's pointing. Know the foul count for each team. Know the score. Know if there are subs at the table. Know who's in the game & their tendencies. Know how reliable the table people are. Know how many TOs each team has. Know whatever there is to know about the game you are working, including when players are in foul trouble.

It's all part of the job. No one's saying to use any of that information to not call the best game possible. We're saying being completely aware of the game you are working will enable you to call the best game possible.

Aw geeze, reading is fundamental.

I didn't disagree with most of the above. Aamof I agree with most of it and have already said so. I still don't agree with one small part of it--that you need to know when a player has four fouls. What I want to know is how that little tidbit of information is going to help me "call the best game possible". Soooooooo, you tell me , Dan.....how is knowing that a player has four fouls going to help me call the best game possible? Exactly what am I supposed to do differently with that knowledge when I get it?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Of course I'm not saying that...but I have been in games where that horn and "That's five on 42" caught me completely by surprise. I don't like that kind of surprise in my games...can you tell me why knowing/being aware that players have four fouls is a BAD thing??? I don't think you can (other than saying it affects the way someone calls the game, but I've already said it doesn't for me so you can't say that again so nyah-nyah). It's an opinion thing, and you know what they say about opinions!

For the record, I never said that it was a bad thing. I said that it's useless information. If it's not going to affect the way that you call the game, then why do you need to know it anyway? I'm still waiting for that question to be answered by someone.

And what exactly is wrong with being surprised when you find out that a player has five fouls btw? What difference does it really make, one way or t'other, when you're informed by the bench?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TD21

Since Jurassic isn't here let me post for him! Show me the facts! I agree that all those things can be useful except how many fouls a player has. I don't have any facts to back up my claims that everything else can be useful but I know for a fact that you don't have the knowledge or the ability to apply the rules! Show me the facts, post your resume and then maybe I'll believe you. I'm actually just saying that, because I will never believe you because that means I'd have to change my ideas of what's right. And I'm always right because you can't show me the facts!

Nope, put it down that I'm coming at this from a......wait for it........ college and above mentality.

Works for me too.

[JoeTheRef]

I don't see where the problem is having knowledge of whether a player has 4 fouls. I think the problem that JR and many of us have is when the poster stated that he wanted the table to notify him when a player has 4 fouls. IMO, nothing GOOD comes from that notification, perception wise. If the table is doing their job then they would will notify you when the player has 5 fouls. That's why you usually have the official scorer, as well as the visiting team scorer at the table. One of those guys are going to make sure the officials are notified when a player has 5 fouls.

There are many ways an official can know how many fouls a player has without being "NOTIFIED" (exception 5th foul). You have the PA announcer announcing the players fouls, you or your partner may be on the table side and hear the table (either scorer) telling the coaches that's "so many" fouls on so and so, shoot you can hear the assistant or somebody else on the bench tell the head coach that's 4 on so and so. But to have the the offical scorer notify you that a player has 4 fouls shouldn't be one of those ways of knowing. Again, my .02.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Aw geeze, reading is fundamental.

I didn't disagree with most of the above. Aamof I agree with most of it and have already said so. I still don't agree with one small part of it--that you need to know when a player has four fouls. What I want to know is how that little tidbit of information is going to help me "call the best game possible". Soooooooo, you tell me , Dan.....how is knowing that a player has four fouls going to help me call the best game possible? Exactly what am I supposed to do differently with that knowledge when I get it?

This has already been answered by others, so I'll try it another way.

There are lots of bits of information that we carry with us that don't necessarily help us call a better game. For instance, when I work a game I make sure I say hello to the security person and that I know who has the locker room key. Does any of this let me do anything differently? No. Do I feel better having this information? Yes.

So now here's a question for you: what do YOU do differently by NOT knowing a player's foul status? There's gotta be something of value to you in so stubbornly ignoring a basic part of the game.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

1) There are lots of bits of information that we carry with us that don't necessarily help us call a better game. For instance, when I work a game I make sure I say hello to the security person and that I know who has the locker room key. Does any of this let me do anything differently? No. Do I feel better having this information? Yes.

2) So now here's a question for you: what do YOU do differently by NOT knowing a player's foul status? There's gotta be something of value to you in so stubbornly ignoring a basic part of the game.

1) If you feel better knowing when a player has four fouls, then good for ya. Seriously. But, again, my point is that particular piece of information is still extraneous and unnecessary to the way that you're going to officiate the game. You admitted to that above too btw- highlighted in red.

2) I don't do ANYTHING differently whether I know a player has four fouls or not. Neither do you. And that's my point. Whatinthehell good is the information to me? Or to you really, other than making you feel better? It might be a basic part of the game, but only as that basic part relates to the player who has four fouls and his team. It doesn't really mean squat to any basic part of the game that relates to us officials(or shouldn't anyway).

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) If you feel better knowing when a player has four fouls, then good for ya. Seriously. But, again, my point is that particular piece of information is still extraneous and unnecessary to the way that you're going to officiate the game. You admitted to that above too btw- highlighted in red.

You say I admitted this as if you've trapped me into admitting I'm the one who blew up that Bhutto woman or designed the 12 foot tiger exhibit walls at the SF zoo. All I'm saying is it's a part of the game so I make it my business to keep track of it.

2) I don't do ANYTHING differently whether I know a player has four fouls or not. Neither do you. And that's my point. Whatinthehell good is the information to me? Or to you really, other than making you feel better? It might be a basic part of the game, but only as that basic part relates to the player who has four fouls and his team. It doesn't really mean squat to any basic part of the game that relates to us officials(or shouldn't anyway).

Of course it relates to us as officials. A player with 4 fouls (or even 2 in the first half) will usually play defense differently. You already agreed with me that we should know the team and player tendencies. So you'll have to agree that there's value in knowing when a player might tend to be less aggressive on defense because he wants to stay in the game.

Seems pretty simple to me.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Of course it relates to us as officials. A player with 4 fouls (or even 2 in the first half) will usually play defense differently. You already agreed with me that we should know the team and player tendencies. So you'll have to agree that there's value in knowing when a player might tend to be less aggressive on defense because he wants to stay in the game.

Yes, the four fouls is maybe going to make the player play differently. The key word is "maybe". However, the fact that the player has four fouls is not going to make Dan officiate any differently. Or other officials like Dan. Ergo, the fact that the player now has four fouls is not going to really mean diddlysquat to Dan. Dan is gonna continue making the same calls at both ends that he has made all game. Dan is not going to anticipate that the player is going to back off on defense. Instead, Dan simply is going to react to what actually happens.

At least I think that's what Dan will do. If I'm wrong, feel free to castigate me for predicting what you would do. I've got a thick skin; I can take it.

You might feel that the player will be less aggressive, and he certainly might be, but you still have to be ready to call the same foul on him that you've been calling all game. Your officiating pattern will not change. And if you're not changing your officiating pattern, what possible good is going to come out of having the knowledge that a player does have four fouls?

Note that my reasoning comes from a mentality that is higher than "college and above" too.

[BLydic]

Unfortunately a response to the OP's question regarding pre-game table talk included a suggestion that the scorer should notify the crew when a player has 4 fouls. Whether this information is useless or not seems somewhat of a personal preference. How the official gets this information might be what sours the whole discussion. Any kind of open communication with an official about the number of fouls a player has, unless it's his/her 5th, can not IMO be recommended. I can't give an example of how this would be detremental because I've never had anyone tell me that's the players 4th, but I can see where a coach from either side might not perceive this to be something we need to know.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yes, the four fouls is maybe going to make the player play differently.

Good, we agree.

Everything else in your post is just Woddy being stubborn.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BLydic

...I can't give an example of how this would be detremental because I've never had anyone tell me that's the players 4th, but I can see where a coach from either side might not perceive this to be something we need to know.

A wise official once said "When you stop worrying about what the players, fans and coaches think, you'll start to become a better official".

In fact he said it in this thread.