If you are the R

[TD21]

Originally Posted by just another ref

You seem like a reasonable fellow. Let me try talking to you in plain language.
Our other esteemed associate answers direct questions by launching off on a tangent in another random direction. When you talk of giving consideration to the one on one match-up and the fact that one player already has one or more fouls when considering the next call, do you not consider that to be giving that player an advantage, or are you telling me that it is an advantage but that is just the way things are/must be/should be done at the "next level?"

I never once said if its a foul but he already has one don't call it. I said according to some here, using the foul is a foul no matter how many a player has or what the situation is, its a foul. My point to all of this was in situation such as this, when you have match ups and a player has a certain number of fouls and his next one will put him on the bench you should, for the good of the game, make sure it is a good foul. Calling a second foul 2 and half minutes into a game on a center who grabs a players arm for a second but doesn't prevent that player from getting to the ball and dunking it is a bad foul call. If he prevent the player from getting the ball its a foul, nothing I can do to help him out. Do we make judgements based on who the player is and what the situation is? Of course we do. If you say we don't then you just don't get it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by TD21

My point to all of this was in situation such as this, when you have match ups and a player has a certain number of fouls and his next one will put him on the bench you should, for the good of the game, make sure it is a good foul. Do we make judgements based on who the player is and what the situation is? Of course we do. If you say we don't then you just don't get it.

And this is your personal philosophy, and having it allows one to advance?
Or this is this system which is adopted by those hoping to advance?

[DonInKansas]

Originally Posted by TD21

when you have match ups and a player has a certain number of fouls and his next one will put him on the bench you should, for the good of the game, make sure it is a good foul.

And while you are standing there trying to remember who that is, how many fouls he has, and whether the foul was "good enough," what the heck's going on in the game? Do they all stop while you're calculating all of this?

If it's a foul, blow the damn whistle. End of story.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by DonInKansas

If it's a foul, blow the damn whistle. End of story.

Don gets it.

Some officials think themselves into trouble.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TD21

My point to all of this was in situation such as this, when you have match ups and a player has a certain number of fouls and his next one will put him on the bench you should, for the good of the game, make sure it is a good foul.

And the fatal flaw in your logic is assuming that maybe some previous fouls weren't good fouls.

If you're calling a game consistently, evenly and fairly with regards to illegal contact, there is no reason in the world to know when any player has four fouls.

[TD21]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And the fatal flaw in your logic is assuming that maybe some previous fouls weren't good fouls.

If you're calling a game consistently, evenly and fairly with regards to illegal contact, there is no reason in the world to know when any player has four fouls.

So you are expecting me to believe that in a three official game every foul call you and your partners made was a good call? Wow, guess some guys never make bad calls. I don't know about you guys but I know when I make a bad call or a call that doesn't fit the game. I am aware of it and I can admitt it. If you can't then you have a problem in the fact that you think you are always right. If you were you would be working that big tourney in March, and even those guys get some wrong. I don't understand how you can sit here and say when whatching guys working on tv, that they get stuff wrong but you don't. I'm sure you are going to say "when did I say I don't get plays wrong?" But you are assuming here that you don't when you say that "And the fatal flaw in your logic is assuming that maybe some previous fouls weren't good fouls." That you never think you make a bad call.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by TD21

So you are expecting me to believe that in a three official game every foul call you and your partners made was a good call? Wow, guess some guys never make bad calls. I don't know about you guys but I know when I make a bad call or a call that doesn't fit the game. I am aware of it and I can admitt it. If you can't then you have a problem in the fact that you think you are always right. If you were you would be working that big tourney in March, and even those guys get some wrong. I don't understand how you can sit here and say when whatching guys working on tv, that they get stuff wrong but you don't. I'm sure you are going to say "when did I say I don't get plays wrong?" But you are assuming here that you don't when you say that "And the fatal flaw in your logic is assuming that maybe some previous fouls weren't good fouls." That you never think you make a bad call.

Funny thing you said that. I know an official that worked one of the high profile "March" games and admitted that one of his partners was having a bad game and based on a couple of events went into the tank. And these are all officials that are pretty high profile and many onlookers would think these guys were almost infallible. Not only does it happen at that level, it definitely happens with officials at our levels. I know I made a few mistakes during the course of the games I had yesterday. I was saved because one of the coaches knows me and likes the way I call the game, but I would like to have one call back without a doubt. And later in that game I wanted to make sure that if I was going to call a foul on this particular player, that I was a little better the next time.

I really do not see why that is hard to understand.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by TD21

My point to all of this was in situation such as this, when you have match ups and a player has a certain number of fouls and his next one will put him on the bench you should, for the good of the game, make sure it is a good foul.

So if the next foul doesn't put him on the bench, and maybe if his opponent has more fouls than he has, it isn't necessary for this one to be a "good foul?"

I suppose this would also be "good for the game."

[TD21]

Originally Posted by just another ref

So if the next foul doesn't put him on the bench, and maybe if his opponent has more fouls than he has, it isn't necessary for this one to be a "good foul?"

I suppose this would also be "good for the game."

You are just adding your own spin on what I'm saying. I never said anything about calling fouls that didn't happen, or not calling fouls that did happen. I'll play your game for a minute. Do you know when you make a bad call? Do you know when you can pass on a play that could have gone either way? Do you understand simple concepts such as a square peg doesn't fit in a round hole?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by TD21

You are just adding your own spin on what I'm saying. I never said anything about calling fouls that didn't happen, or not calling fouls that did happen. I'll play your game for a minute. Do you know when you make a bad call? Do you know when you can pass on a play that could have gone either way? Do you understand simple concepts such as a square peg doesn't fit in a round hole?

Nobody said anything about calling fouls that didn't happen. That, at least is a good thing agreed upon by all. But when you refer to "making sure that it is a good foul," this is when the trouble starts. If you say that the second or third foul "must be a good foul" because it will put a guy on the bench, this insinuates that it was not necessary for the first one to be a "good foul." As for being aware of a bad call when you make it, sure, sometimes you have one that looks bad in retrospect. Could that affect my next call in the same borderline situation? Possibly, but not because of the fact that it is on a star player. Does a square peg fit in a round hole? No, but if the hole is big enough, you can hide a bunch of squares and other inconsistent shapes in it and try to convince people that they fit.

[TD21]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Nobody said anything about calling fouls that didn't happen. That, at least is a good thing agreed upon by all. But when you refer to "making sure that it is a good foul," this is when the trouble starts. If you say that the second or third foul "must be a good foul" because it will put a guy on the bench, this insinuates that it was not necessary for the first one to be a "good foul." As for being aware of a bad call when you make it, sure, sometimes you have one that looks bad in retrospect. Could that affect my next call in the same borderline situation? Possibly, but not because of the fact that it is on a star player. Does a square peg fit in a round hole? No, but if the hole is big enough, you can hide a bunch of squares and other inconsistent shapes in it and try to convince people that they fit.

I think you are starting to get it a little.........We've got you to admit that sometimes you make a bad call. good. what scares me is instead of finding the peg that fits in the hole you'd rather put something in there that doesn't and convince people it does. So I guess you can make a call that doesn't fit and convince a coach that that is in fact what happened. But since your calls aren't wrong, they just sometimes "might" look bad, I guess you are good at convincing people that what you have done is correct, it just looks really bad. Guess you are good at hiding the "inconsistencies" in your game.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by TD21

what scares me is instead of finding the peg that fits in the hole you'd rather put something in there that doesn't and convince people it does.

This was a reference to your philosophy, not mine.

[TD21]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This was a reference to your philosophy, not mine.

You said it not me. You can't say something and then tell someone that it is their philosophy. Its like blowing your whistle and telling the coach that your partner called it not you.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by TD21

Do you understand simple concepts such as a square peg doesn't fit in a round hole?

Yeah, it does.