HERES THE SCENE:
6th grade boys playing width ways on court.
4th quarter, gold 23,red 23.
With seconds left, gold shoots and misses.
Gold rebounds under basket and has ball above his head.
Red backs into gold.
I call foul,1&1 on the floor.
Time expires.
Gold makes 1st attempt. Game over.
Red coach congratulates me. NOT!
My assignor quotes me the unwritten philosophy,"Officials do not decide the outcome of a game".
I say, a foul in the first quarter is a foul in the fourth quarter. By not calling a foul I screw the gold player who was not allowed to attempt a try at the basket.
I'm tired of hearing the,No blood no foul in last 30 seconds, routine.
If the players/coaches know that's how you officiate then
you leave yourself wide open for big trouble.
Hero or Zero?

You did not commit the foul, you did not make the FT, or any of the other 23 points. Find a new assignor.

If you've been making that type of call for the whole game you are a hero.

Although I generally agree with the "the same in the first and fourth" I would ask one question...

Given where the gold player was, could he have gotten the shot off before time expired?

Was it the kind of foul that you should put a player at the line to win the game? ( was it obvious? was it cheap?had you let the same kind of foul go off and on throughout the game or did you call the samething as a foul throughout the game?

If yes it was a good call, if nottry harder next time. Officials dont ever decide the outcome of the game but we have a hand in it! I did not see the play ( I know copout) but you need to let your conscience be your guide!

For me to call a foul in this situation, it has to be an obvious foul in the 16 row. If the person who assigns your games says don't call a foul in that situation, then next time don't call it. Don't take his criticism personal.

Please explain what kind of foul you would call only if it didn't put a player "at the line to win the game".

Whether or not a particular foul creates a situation that can affect the final score or not is the player's decision, not ours. He (OK, Juulie, or she) commits the foul, not us. We only point it out to everybody when it happens.

If you called it this way in the first minute, then you call it this way in the final minute - period.

Now Kelvin, I know you meant to ask whether or not it was enough of a foul to call in the first place, and certainly I know you were just making sure the call was consistant with what had gone on during the game, but I just wanted to emphasize that "swallowing your whistle" late in a close game is something that is commonplace in hockey (unfortunately), and should not be in basketball.

Deciding the Game
 

I may be putting words in your mouth, but the unwritten assumption in your reply is you agree with this: Call it different at the end.

------

Try this:

Gold 24, Red 23

So, the exact same play happened to Gold in the 1st quarter: you gave FT's. Gold made 1.

Now, the play happens to Red as time expires, NO Call, no FT's; Red loses.

--------
If ever an official has decided a game, it is by not calling the play the same each time it happens.

Whether this is a good call or bad call is not the issue.
You are forgetting rule number one:

Your assignor is ALWAYS right.....

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Padgett
[B]Please explain what kind of foul you would call only if it didn't put a player "at the line to win the game".

QUOTE]

How about, score tied, one sec. left in the game, ball is 90' away from A1's basket, A1 on the floor with the ball, B1 reaches in for the ball and slaps the arm of A1 and dislodges the ball and the ball goes about 5 feet away from anyone. Would you call a foul?

I thought the rules interpreters were always right...Guess I'll have to add another person to the list? Hmm, let's see:

1 Wife
2 State Rules Interpreter
3 Middle School BBall Assignor

I don't think so.

I wasn't there so I can't speak to the validity of the foul but if it was there and you called it, you did good. A foul in the first is a foul in the fourth. I think the opposite is equally valid as well. If the assignor merely heard about it from the coach and jumped you, he's wrong for getting information from a biased source. If he was standing right beside you when you had the whistle, you may want to consider his input.

Re: Deciding the Game
 

We all make a call or no call during a game, where when we think about it we wish we had it to do over again. So, at the end of the game i'm going to make sure my focus is refereeing according to the game situation. A holding away from the ball and out of the play with time running out is a call i would not make. In the beginning of the game and i want to clean up the game or because of plenty of time where the player being held could still be involved in the game,i might make that call. So, in your play Red loses. tough break!

My assignor quotes me the unwritten philosophy,"Officials do not decide the outcome of a game".

I assigned softball and volleyball in my aea for a few years. I left the mechanics and rules to the Instructional Chairperson.

Bob

Assigners do not tell officials how to call a game. A foul in the first thirty seconds of the game is a foul in the last thirty seconds of the game. I am tired of officials who lack the intestinal fortitude to do the job for which they have been hired.

The definition of a no call is that the official saw an infraction of the rules and decided to ignore the infraction and that is unacceptable conduct by an official.

Mark always a good quote.

As far as officials deciding games. What is wrong with that? There are many decisions that must be made during the game that could go either way. In the last few minutes of a game that decision needs to be the same as what you would have made in the first few minutes of the game. I have decided a game in the same fashion you mentioned except it was a little more of a decision. I had to decide illegal screen or pushing through the screen. It was a tie game and both teams in the double bonus with five seconds left in the game. A player is on the floor. What do you call? I made the call, the visiting coach didn't like it but until you show me on film I was wrong, I believe I was right to my dying day. The point is, we have to make a decision.

Mark - I agree with your first statement.

However, your second - to me, a "no call" is an infraction that is perceived (usually by the "victim") to have occurred, but is one which the offical decides did not result in any advantage/disadvantage and therefor should not be called.

But hey - now I'm arguing over semantics.