Partner called Travel OOB?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Young IN Ref

Hi everyone!

I've been lurking on the threads for a few months, and enjoy seeing the new topics/conversations every day. I have a situation and wanted to know how you handle it.

JH game last week. Partner is an older gentleman, out of shape, walks up and down the court, but does a lot of games at this particular school. We barely spoke before the game. He sat, reading the newspaper next to the scorer's table until after the teams were on the court for tipoff. I tried to initiate at least some conversation, but he didn't want to talk and just brushed it off.

Anyways.

Game is going...OK.

I am lead as A1 (White) makes a basket, and before B1 (Red) steps OOB, HC-B requests timeout. Partner grants, and I remain at the spot. B1 returns after the timeout. I verbally tell her that she may run the baseline, and also make a visual sweeping motion with my hand. B1 takes one step left, and then runs 3-4 steps right, staying OOB. Partner, from across halfcourt, calls "traveling." I am confused, and jog out to conference with him.

Me: What did you call?
Him: Traveling
Me: There's no traveling on throw-in. It was after a made basket. She can run the baseline.
Him: They called timeout. That means they can't anymore.

He then loudly says "White ball" and turns away from me. I say "Billy Bob," but he ignores/doesn't hear me, and walks away.

Rather than yell at him to come back, and look silly at midcourt having a pissing contest about who was right/wrong, I walk back to the baseline and say "White ball." B1 looks at me funny, but says nothing. HC-B makes no complaints that I can hear, and play resumes.

1. How do you handle this situation when you know your partner is mis-interpreting the rules. I tried to give him information to correct his call, but he didn't want to hear it. I can't overturn his call, merely give him information to make it correct? Let him live/die because it's wrong?

Since you're administering the throw-in, give it to red. Let him phone the assignor and make plans to have the egg removed from this face.

[truerookie]

It's my call I will not allow another official misapply the rules intentionally especially when I know they are not correct. Yours must not have dropped yet.

[falsecut]

Originally Posted by truerookie

It's my call I will not allow another official misapply the rules intentionally especially when I know they are not correct. Yours must not have dropped yet.

Is there an English translation of this? What "must not have dropped yet?" ???

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by falsecut

Is there an English translation of this? What "must not have dropped yet?" ???

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Yours must not have dropped yet.

I think this is over the line, in this case. The poster is admittedly young -- probably relatively new -- and dealing with a much older, more established (although perhaps less qualified) official. It's not easy at all to go against the forceful ruling of a more advanced official when you're just starting out.

The original poster knows the rule but doesn't know how to deal with a difficult situation. Insulting him/her for being a little intimidated in a very intimidating situation is not helpful at all.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I think this is over the line, in this case. The poster is admittedly young -- probably relatively new -- and dealing with a much older, more established (although perhaps less qualified) official. It's not easy at all to go against the forceful ruling of a more advanced official when you're just starting out.

The original poster knows the rule but doesn't know how to deal with a difficult situation. Insulting him/her for being a little intimidated in a very intimidating situation is not helpful at all.

Added to the fact that this is his very first post and he's asking a question most officials have had at one time or another (how to deal with a difficult, more experienced partner), I agree completely.

[Splute]

Good point Scrappy. I too had a situation this year where my veteran co-official blew my OOB admin dead. The thrower-in dribbled while OOB on the throw-in. I continued my 5-sec count but partner blew whistle, ran over and said violation for dribbling OOB. I leaned over and told him it was legal. He said no, it isnt. I turned and headed down court so that we do not look worse; most people do not know that rule anyway. After the game I emailed him the rule. Never got a response back, tho.

[ca_rumperee]

Originally Posted by Splute

Good point Scrappy. I too had a situation this year where my veteran co-official blew my OOB admin dead. The thrower-in dribbled while OOB on the throw-in. I continued my 5-sec count but partner blew whistle, ran over and said violation for dribbling OOB. I leaned over and told him it was legal. He said no, it isnt. I turned and headed down court so that we do not look worse; most people do not know that rule anyway. After the game I emailed him the rule. Never got a response back, tho.

I had a kid dribble very close to the endline on an inbounds play. If any part of the ball contacts inbounds during that dribble, then we have a violation, yes?

vert.

[Splute]

Originally Posted by ca_rumperee

I had a kid dribble very close to the endline on an inbounds play. If any part of the ball contacts inbounds during that dribble, then we have a violation, yes?

vert.

Based on the definitions of a "throw-in" in Rule 4, yes ... if he dribbles the ball in bounds and touches it again, i have a violation. If his dribble went inbounds and he does not touch it again (unlikely)... I would consider it a throw-in and discontinue my count... however, until the ball is touched by another player the throw-in does not end, just the throw-in count.

[truerookie]

[QUOTE=Scrapper1]I think this is over the line, in this case. The poster is admittedly young -- probably relatively new -- and dealing with a much older, more established (although perhaps less qualified) official. It's not easy at all to go against the forceful ruling of a more advanced official when you're just starting out.

Ok, and this means what. It is obvious that the poster can identify that the older gentlemen is lazy and out of shape from his initial observation of him. He should be able to identify that he allowed this older lazy gentlemen encourage him to kick a rule. When he stated himself that it was wrong. So how is that over the line Scrapper.

[inigo montoya]

It's over the line because of what you're asking some who is not only new to officiating but also young. By the book, one official does not have the authority to overrule another. What everyone is suggesting here takes something that you don't come to possess just by putting on the stripes and a whistle. Your response did not in anyway help this guy do his job better. I don't know how things are where you are, but there is a shortage of good officials where I am. But when new guys come in, you can't expect them to be pros immediately. If we put that expectation on them, we're only going to drive them away and I know we can't afford that here.

[truerookie]

[QUOTE=inigo montoya]It's over the line because of what you're asking some who is not only new to officiating but also young. I don't know how things are where you are, but there is a shortage of good officials where I am.

How does this makes this young official a good official in the future?



By allowing a rule to be kick because of a veteran official misapplication of a rule. I think it hurts more than help this young official. In the future, he may not ever attempt to stand by a what he believe is correct because of someone's veteran status. Because he will always remember this time in which a veteran overturn his call. Officiating is about developing confidence too just in case you have forgotten.

By this official being young it can cause second guessing too in the future when it comes to rule application due to the status of his partner(s).

So, I still stand by what I said.

It's just as wrong to kick a rule.

[deecee]

[QUOTE=truerookie]

Originally Posted by inigo montoya

It's over the line because of what you're asking some who is not only new to officiating but also young. I don't know how things are where you are, but there is a shortage of good officials where I am.

How does this makes this young official a good official in the future?



By allowing a rule to be kick because of a veteran official misapplication of a rule. I think it hurts more than help this young official. In the future, he may not ever attempt to stand by a what he believe is correct because of someone's veteran status. Because he will always remember this time in which a veteran overturn his call. Officiating is about developing confidence too just in case you have forgotten.

By this official being young it can cause second guessing too in the future when it comes to rule application due to the status of his partner(s).

So, I still stand by what I said.

It's just as wrong to kick a rule.

Do you condone a full on argument at half court -- or any part of the court -- between the 2 officials? sometimes you gotta get in and get out. Him arguing would not have changed anything except to get Billy Bob to start into more weight throwing during the rest of the game.

[Splute]

[quote]

Originally Posted by truerookie By allowing a rule to be kick because of a veteran official misapplication of a rule. I think it hurts more than help this young official. In the future, he may not ever attempt to stand by a what he believe is correct because of someone's veteran status. Because he will always remember this time in which a veteran overturn his call. Officiating is about developing confidence too just in case you have forgotten.

By this official being young it can cause second guessing too in the future when it comes to rule application due to the status of his partner(s).

So, I still stand by what I said.

It's just as wrong to kick a rule.[/quote

In my opinion, since that is what we are obviously throwing around, he stood his ground by letting the Vet official know what the ruling should be... he was still overruled. There is a time and place for every battle, he will need to choose those carefully. Nothing will be gained by two officials hashing it out on the court. Get the game started and move on. Its about the kids playing; not the officials debating.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by truerookie

Officiating is about developing confidence too just in case you have forgotten.

Rook, how exactly does telling him that he has no balls help to develop his confidence?

Your point that he allowed the vet to intimidate him into deliberately misapplying a rule is valid. But telling a new official who already knows the situation was mishandled that he's less than a man was the part that was over the line, IMHO.

If you disagree, so be it. I don't want to make this thread about me. Just my thoughts on your comment.