Halftime adjustments?

[bellnier]

Just curious is all...

I was watching a BV Sectional game last night and there was little flow, in either direction, in the first half...foul and violation calls on nearly every trip. The second half was like an entirely different game with significantly fewer whistles. I could see how both teams made adjustments, but it was pretty apparent that the officials made some adjustments as well. How does this work? I officiate a sport where there is only one ref, so I never get the opportunity to get input from a second official at halftime. Thanks.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

You poor guy. Must be a soccer ref.

Anyhow, we always talk at halftime and adjust as necessary. It really depends on the game, the level of play, etc.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by bellnier

.....but it was pretty apparent that the officials made some adjustments as well. How does this work?

Can you explain what you saw? IYO, what adjustments did you perceive the refs made? Did they "loosen up?" Not call as much? Not make the same calls? Let em play more or tighten up? Just curious.

[bellnier]

W&S --- not soccer!

grunewar --- officials seemed to lighten up a bit on carries (both point guards were iffy with their stop-and-go moves...4 or 5 called in first half, maybe one in second) and contact fouls under basket, esp. rebounding, were called fewer times. Other changes I couldn't identify because this is a sport totally unlike mine...it's really, really tough seeing everything you folks see...but the flow was palpably better in 2nd half.

[Adam]

Are you sure the officials adjusted? Sometimes, after having 4 or 5 carries called in the first half, players actually adjust and stop violating.
Same goes for fouls.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bellnier

...but the flow was palpably better in 2nd half.

Usually the reason for the flow becoming better isn't the officials changing anything. It's the officials being consistent and the players adjusting to their consistency.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by bellnier

W&S --- not soccer!

grunewar --- officials seemed to lighten up a bit on carries (both point guards were iffy with their stop-and-go moves...4 or 5 called in first half, maybe one in second) and contact fouls under basket, esp. rebounding, were called fewer times. Other changes I couldn't identify because this is a sport totally unlike mine...it's really, really tough seeing everything you folks see...but the flow was palpably better in 2nd half.

I had a game a few weeks back similar to the one you discuss - but it was the coaches and players who adjusted.

At halftime, my partner and I discussed all the fouls, hand checks, rough play, etc. the game had no flow. We discussed: things to look out for in the second half, hand checks, blocks, players to watch, a double whistle, maybe being out of position on a play or a late switch, etc.

Within the first minute of the second half - TWEET! I called another hold! Darn, were we going to have this again? Nope. Buzzer! Coach immediately replaced the player who committed the foul. Apparently, the teams had also talked about what we were calling and the coaches were going to have none of the sloppy play either. 2nd half was good basketball.

[bellnier]

Not 100% 'sure', but just that feeling that there was something going on besides the kids adjusting. In my sport (rugby) the ref sometimes chats with his/her 2 touch-judges at halftime (and during the game) but typically, at the HS and College level, they are representatives of the opposing teams so objectivity is an issue. It's pretty tough with 30 players on the pitch at once and it would be great if there was a second objective soul to discuss penalty calls, game management, etc.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by bellnier

Not 100% 'sure', but just that feeling that there was something going on besides the kids adjusting. In my sport (rugby) the ref sometimes chats with his/her 2 touch-judges at halftime (and during the game) but typically, at the HS and College level, they are representatives of the opposing teams so objectivity is an issue. It's pretty tough with 30 players on the pitch at once and it would be great if there was a second objective soul to discuss penalty calls, game management, etc.

I thought the only rule in rugby was that there aren't any rules......

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

I thought the only rule in rugby was that there aren't any rules......

Naw... I think that's the UFC.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Naw... I think that's the UFC.

Which is Rugby without the ball.

[JugglingReferee]

I'm a bit hesitant about making halftime adjustments. I've worked very hard on being a consistent official. If coaches take the time during the break to change their game, and then I go and change my game, they have reason to be frustrated by not knowing what to expect from the officials.

I think it's fair for officials to recognize at halftime the changes that the teams are making. Even this past weekend, my P and I discussed how the teams were changing their games based on the time left in the game and the score. Regional playoffs can make teams play very fundamental basketball.

[JRutledge]

I have no problem with officials making adjustments. I know it is common that officials discuss the events of the first half and then address those issues in the second half. For example, are we seeing screens and we might talk about making sure we call some things early or make sure we are not missing many illegal screens, hand checking or other things that were common in the first half.

But having said all of that, this does not mean what was witnessed was an adjustment by the officials. I also do not feel you sacrifice consistency because you decide to address things in a different half or even quarter.

[bellnier]

In rugby we take the advantage-disadvantage principle to extreme...for example, if defense (white) commits an infraction against offense (black), offense is allowed to continue play until the official deems that any advantage they may have had before the penalty was reversed by the defensive players mistake. Retention of advantage may be yardage gained, completion of pass(es), etc. and can be somewhat subjective. If no advantage is lost, then no whistle. Official announces on field 'advantage black' when the infraction is commited. The announcement is not always heard from the sidelines so to the typical observer this indeed looks like a 'rule-less' game, but in fact this concept ensures good game flow with very few interruptions.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bellnier

In rugby we take the advantage-disadvantage principle to extreme...for example, if defense (white) commits an infraction against offense (black), offense is allowed to continue play until the official deems that any advantage they may have had before the penalty was removed by the defensive players mistake. Retention of advantage may be yardage gained, completion of pass(es), etc. and is somewhat subjective. If no advantage is lost, then no whistle. Official announces on field 'advantage black' when the infraction is commited. To the typical observer, this indeed looks like a 'rule-less' game, but in fact this concept ensures good game flow with very few interruptions.

In basketball at least when it comes to fouls, that is very similar. What we call in basketball is very subjective. And that is why you will see official argue over what should be done or what should not be done. Because the rules ask for the basketball officials to not call fouls just based on contact, but to call fouls if there movement is affected which also brings a lot of subjectivity. As it relates to calling a foul from one half to another, it is possible that officials discussed these situations and decide not to be so quick to blow their whistle or in some cases to be quicker. That happens even from quarter to quarter based on the type of game that is being played.

Peace