Officiate or keep score

[Gochron]

This my second year officiating, 1st year JV & Int. I have work with partner for a few games now, who seems to be keeping tabs on how many fouls each player has and appears to create make up calls (if one teams gets a charge he will LOOK for a charge on the other team). I may be new, but this is not what they call game management, is it? He even went so far as to call a foul on a player who was close to the play (but did not foul) because the person who fouled already had 2 fouls. (it was still early in 1st half) He has been officiating for 8 years and I really don't know what to tell him. Am I looking at this wrong?

Aloha

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Gochron
This my second year officiating, 1st year JV & Int. I have work with partner for a few games now, who seems to be keeping tabs on how many fouls each player has and appears to create make up calls (if one teams gets a charge he will LOOK for a charge on the other team). I may be new, but this is not what they call game management, is it? He even went so far as to call a foul on a player who was close to the play (but did not foul) because the person who fouled already had 2 fouls. (it was still early in 1st half) He has been officiating for 8 years and I really don't know what to tell him. Am I looking at this wrong?

Aloha

Some officials spend too much time worried about staying out of trouble than officiating the game. I personally do not worry about this myself. Officiate the game and let the chips fall where they may.

I agree you should be aware of things that affect the game, but understand what you call and why you will be much better off.

Peace

[Oz Referee]

Your partner is WRONG. There is no way to couch this comments, he is just WRONG. Referees should never "make-up" calls, and I wonder how much this ref can be concentrating on the game, if he is keeping track of fouls as well.

I basically never know how many fouls a player has. The only exceptions are after each period when I look at the sheet to see if any players are on 4 fouls - that was I know that if I call the 5th then they are out. Also, when I referee players I know (especially my brother) I usually have a rough idea of how many they may have - but it is an unconcious thing.

As an aside, my younger brother holds the record for NSW State League (about the same as DIV2 NCAA, but open age). He played 2 consecutive seasons (all told about 60 games) fouling out in every game! He is not a bad player, a solid role player. Good rebounder and shot blocker, plays at the 4 but can shoot. However his hands are way slower than his head. He always goes for the strip or the block, but by the time his hands get there it's a foul. His coaches have always known this, but let him play it out anyway. He always fouls out quicker when I referee him, since I know all the little tricks in his game, and see a lot of the fouls that other refs notice. It's kinda funny, other teams hate me refereeing him, beacuse they think I am going to be biased towards him, when really it usually turns out the other way.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by Oz Referee
Your partner is WRONG. There is no way to couch this comments, he is just WRONG. Referees should never "make-up" calls, and I wonder how much this ref can be concentrating on the game, if he is keeping track of fouls as well.

Absolutely agree without any reservation. This policy is inviolate.

I basically never know how many fouls a player has. The only exceptions are after each period when I look at the sheet to see if any players are on 4 fouls - that was I know that if I call the 5th then they are out.

Have to disagree here, however. Never make an effort or represent to anyone, especially the scorer, that you want to know how many individual fouls any player has until they reach the 5th. You are just asking for trouble if coaches know you know a player has 4, or for that matter, 0, at any given time in a game. "You didn't call that because he already has 4" is what they will think, and probably say, too. If a player has 4 and there is an "iffy" foul and you let it go, and everyone knows you know he has 4 - can you see the danger there in just giving the appearance of protecting a player. Conversly, if he has 4 and you call it, even if you would have called it if he had 0, you'll get just the opposite perception from coaches, players and fans. I tell scorers prior to the game to tell us ONLY when and if a player reaches 5. I suggest you do the same, too.

As an aside, my younger brother holds the record for NSW State League (about the same as DIV2 NCAA, but open age). He played 2 consecutive seasons (all told about 60 games) fouling out in every game! He always fouls out quicker when I referee him, since I know all the little tricks in his game, and see a lot of the fouls that other refs notice. It's kinda funny, other teams hate me refereeing him, beacuse they think I am going to be biased towards him, when really it usually turns out the other way.

Years ago, I reffed my son in rec league sometimes. The same thing happened. He always was a very physical player (he wore a T-shirt in warmups that said "No reconstructive surgery - no foul.") and I "knew his tricks" too. I called a lot of fouls on him, probably disproportionate to the other players, not because I was trying to compensate, but because I was watching him all the time.

[Kelvin green]

You shold never make stuff up so in that respect your partner is wrong....

I will have to take the DARK SIDE on this one, but good game management means knowing who is in foul trouble. You shold know who has fouls?

Why? I have had a couple of games where visitor book had 3, home book had only two ( assigned foul to wrng person) and it was corrected because my partner and I knew the fouls. It is tough to keep track mentally of all of them particularly if there are 30 or 40 fouls called. but you should have an idea.

If you know who just picked up their third foul, and it is a starter I might be more lenient in getting a sub in so that they dont pick up the fourth.

If I know they have four, the fifth foul will need to be a good call. I have no problem with fouling out a kid. (Ask the dozen or so kids so far this year) The fifth foul should not be ticky tacky, or a slight brush foul....

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by Kelvin green
You shold never make stuff up so in that respect your partner is wrong....

I will have to take the DARK SIDE on this one, but good game management means knowing who is in foul trouble. You shold know who has fouls?

Why? I have had a couple of games where visitor book had 3, home book had only two ( assigned foul to wrng person) and it was corrected because my partner and I knew the fouls. It is tough to keep track mentally of all of them particularly if there are 30 or 40 fouls called. but you should have an idea.

If you know who just picked up their third foul, and it is a starter I might be more lenient in getting a sub in so that they dont pick up the fourth.

If I know they have four, the fifth foul will need to be a good call. I have no problem with fouling out a kid. (Ask the dozen or so kids so far this year) The fifth foul should not be ticky tacky, or a slight brush foul....

Kelvin - I have to say I disagree with just about everything you say here. If you called games in which you didn't call a foul on a player because you knew he had 4 when you would have called that same amount of contact a foul if he had fewer fouls, I would ask never to officiate with you again. This attitude is 180 degrees opposite to the spirit, intent and letter of the rules.

Maybe the insight into your position is your statement that you "...have no problem with fouling out a kid." I have never "fouled out a kid." I am not responsible for kids committing fouls. They do that themselves - I just point it out to everyone when it happens. If they do it five times in a game, they are gone.

You talk about fouls being "ticky tacky, or a slight brush foul...". Again - an action is either always a foul, or never a foul - period. When you act like you suggest, then you , not the kids, are deciding the outcome of the game.

[Edited by Mark Padgett on Feb 10th, 2002 at 12:10 PM]

[JRutledge]

You need to know who the stars are.

You need to know who shoots three's.

You need to know who goes to the basket everytime they have the ball.

You need to know who has several fouls on them (3 or 4).

You need to know who plays out of control.

Basically you need to know as much about your game as possible. This will keep you out of trouble, help you control the game. The more you know, the better you will handle situations. Nothing will happen and you were not perpared for it.

If you know who the star is on a team, and that star makes several fouls in half or quarter, who do you think you are going to take the heat for fouling? It does not mean that you not call fouls, but if you foul out the one player that gives their team a chance to win, you might have to keep the coach off of you and deal with the frustration of the players if they feel their chances just went down the tubes. I would never say change your game, but be aware of what the future might hold, because then you can deal with or handle it before the bottom falls out.

Most T situations that I have ever seen are usually because the officials did not handle the situation earlier. I am not saying that you control this, but you can be aware and make it know that you are aware to the appropriate parties so they are aware. When players and coaches are aware that you see things going too far, if they cross the line, they do it with the full knowledge of the circumstances of their actions. And in the end that covers your a$$ and they cannot say you did not warn them.

This to me is no different then understanding the kind of offenses or defenses that teams run. A motion offense is going to have more screening so as an official, you have to be prepared for illegal contact by both teams. If a team runs a post up offense with a big center, where do you think the defense is going to be at?

All this does is prepare you before the situation blows up in your face. It does not mean it will, but if you are prepared for the worst, you might be able to stop it.

Peace

[BigJoe]

This is a tough thing for a young official. Maybe you could find a veteran that isn't working some night to come to your game. On an aside tell him what you have told us. Tell your partner that he is coming to watch you and give you pointers on your mechanics. Then he can tell your partner what he is doing is very wrong. I agree completely with Mr. Padgett. Mr. Rutledge for once is pretty off base on some of his observations. The only time I seem to get in trouble is when I go into games with preconceived notions about one player or how one team will play. We are in an area where we only have 20 schools within an hours drive, so we see teams at most twice a year. I believe each game should be called on its own merits and what happens in that game should be what you see, not what you think will happen ahead of time. I had a partner once who would warn me ahead of time which player was the star player and not to give him "cheap" fouls as then his team would have no chance to win. I don't think it is our responsibility for him not to get "cheap fouls" it is the players. I seldom know how many fouls a player has or do I pay ANY attention to the disparity in team fouls. As a matter of fact, the only time I look at the score is when I'm the umpire and I make sure the scoreboard and the bookkeeper match. Also, near the end of the game and we might have to watch for a last second shot.
Keep them "straight up"

[paulis]

I think most of us would agree that this is not how we are supposed to officiate. Question is: what do you do? Regardless if you are a rookie, 2nd year or a veteran how do you handle this situation. I like BigJoe's suggestion to have a third party get involved. What else to do?

This past weekend I did some youth games with a partner who not only did not get up and down the court but constantly was not watching the play! Ball would go out of bounds on his sideline and no whistle. Nothing. Later he confessed that he was pre-occupied or some other lame excuse. I tried to compensate for him so that the kids would suffer too much and promptly informed the assignor not to assign me to work with him again (stating my reasons). So maybe this is a way to handle it. How else?

[Kelvin green]

Mark, I will have to disagree with you but when a player fouls out on a cheap call, the coach will be all over you. My point was that it should not be a cheap foul that puts the kid out of the game. I doubt that you'll admit it, but I bet you have seen some lame calls that have ended up being the fifth... Rut is right!

[Oz Referee]

Kelvin,

When I referee (and I reckon Mark will say the same) there are no "cheap" calls. There are fouls, and that's it.

If you admit that you have called "cheap" fouls before, then I think you need to look at your game management. Anything that you would call as a player's first foul, MUST be called in the same way when it is their fifth.

This is the same as referee's changing the way they are calling a game in the last quarter. The fourth should be called the same as the first.

[physicsref]

I think I've got to chime in with JRut and Kelvin on this one. Here is my reasoning:

1. What does it harm you to know what the game situation is? This does not mean you have to make drastic changes in the way you call a game, it just means being aware. The example of letting the coach get his sub in for his star who has 4 fouls was a great one.

2. This talk of "a foul is a foul is a foul and is either always a foul or never a foul" is rubbish. Whatever happened to advantage/disadvantage? Yeah, a handcheck is a foul, but are you going to take away A1's drive for an open layup cause a handcheck is always a foul? What about the slight illegal contact on a rebound that doesn't affect the play? What if the coach has been counting 1-2-3 all night and by golly you're going to make sure you've got 3-seconds before he talks you into a call.

3. This talk about knowing how many fouls a player has disrupting the perception of the game works both ways. You get one coach who says "You didn't call that 'cause he has 4 fouls", where the opposite case is the other coach complaining about a bump in the back on a rebound where the offended player keeps the ball "You're gonna foul my guy out on that?"

Now, in deference to those with differing opinions, this should be a little thing. It's not a matter of checking every time you go to the table that you want to know how many a guy's got. You know when you've dinged a guy several times already. Just glance at the board when you check the clock and see his number and the number of fouls. If you still want to go with "a foul is a foul", does knowing this stop you from doing this at all?

[ChuckElias]

Generally, I agree that it doesn't hurt to know the game situation, if you can do it and still keep focus on the calls you need to make. I think Rut overstated his case a little, but that's a matter of opinion. I don't think it's necessary to know every aspect of the game situation at all times. Although, as I said, if you can do it and still focus on the action, then more power to ya.

The only thing I take issue with in physicref's post is the following:

Originally posted by physicsref
2. Whatever happened to advantage/disadvantage? [snip] What about the slight illegal contact on a rebound that doesn't affect the play?

The contact that doesn't affect the play is not illegal, generally. A slight bump that puts no one at a disadvantage (and how could it, since as stated, it doesn't affect the play?) is not a foul. So the comment seems to me to be more or less irrelevant to the discussion at hand. I don't think that is the kind of call that we've been talking about in this thread.

I think the "cheap" fouls that we've been talking about occur in situations where:

1) there is contact
2) the contact affects the opponent
3) but the opponent is able to continue playing without significant trouble (e.g., a turnover, falling to the floor, etc.).

I called one of these "cheapies" last night and kicked myself for it in the locker room. Was it an illegal screen? Yes. Did it put the defender at a disadvantage? Probably. Should I have called it in the closing minute of a 15 point game? Not a chance. (Have I taken to answering my own questions? Apparently.)

If this had been the player's fifth foul, I would have felt bad -- worse, I should say -- about calling it.

Chuck

[Mark Padgett]

Originally posted by physicsref
2. This talk of "a foul is a foul is a foul and is either always a foul or never a foul" is rubbish. Whatever happened to advantage/disadvantage? Yeah, a handcheck is a foul, but are you going to take away A1's drive for an open layup cause a handcheck is always a foul?

The principle of advantage/disadvantage does not apply in relation to how may fouls a player already has. That's my point. It has nothing to do with deciding on a no call to avoid stopping a clear path to the basket on a hand-check, etc. That's part of my other point. If you make the decision to let this go, then you let it go the entire game, regardless of how many fouls a player has. Again, either a foul is a foul all the time, or it isn't all the time. If you decide it isn't in a particular situation, then it isn't in all of the same situations for the game. I have no problem with that.

There's a difference between knowing how many fouls a player has and everyone knowing you know how many fouls a player has. If the former does not influence your judgment on how you call the game, then that's how it should be. If it does help you represent how you manage a game in your court demeanor, that's a different story, and I think that's what Rut was trying to get across.

However, if everyone knows you know how many fouls a player has, especially late in a game, you are asking for trouble.

[Edited by Mark Padgett on Feb 12th, 2002 at 10:44 AM]