Call Consistency as a Crew

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

[If you are letting marginal contact go when B1 is shooting in the post at one end but your partner(s) is sending A1 to the free throw line on the same contact at the other then you don't have consistency and Coach B will soon be earning a Technical foul. It most definitely has to addressed in the pre-game and, if need be, at halftime.

I get what you're trying to say, but where's the line that makes it "the same contact" and different enough contact to warrant a different call? Often enough what appears to be "the same contact" isn't at all the same from different angles. That's where I struggle with the consistency concept.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Look, I understand what you're saying - get the call right.

Nah, I think JR's saying you're "wrong."

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Nah, I think JR's saying you're "wrong."

In other words, I'm f***ed?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

JR, every call can not be made in a vacuum. If you are letting marginal contact go when B1 is shooting in the post at one end but your partner(s) is sending A1 to the free throw line on the same contact at the other then you don't have consistency and Coach B will soon be earning a Technical foul. It most definitely has to addressed in the pre-game and, if need be, at halftime.

If you're doing the job properly, you're not making close block/charge calls...or any call.... in a vacuum. You're making the call as per what happened on that particular call ONLY, not on what happened on some call that might have occurred a half ago. Consistency doesn't mean that ALL close calls must be either a block or a charge. Doing it the way that you suggest is nothing but a cop-out imo. Any official who has become competent, proficient and experienced at a certain level is good enough to make any call based solely on the merits of that call only. They are also as equally competent, experienced and efficient to deal with the consequences of the calls that they make.

Imo you are giving way too little credit to the majority of officials out there who are good enough to pick out the subtle differences in what might appear to be similar calls, but are are actually quite different...maybe because a defender might have slightly leaned sideways at the very last second, or something similar to that. And only one official on the floor might be in a position to pick out that subtle difference. Does that mean that he's still not supposed to make the right call because all previous calls have been charges?

Sorry, but I don't agree with the "perception is reality" school of officiating. I believe that reality is reality.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Smitty

I get what you're trying to say, but where's the line that makes it "the same contact" and different enough contact to warrant a different call? Often enough what appears to be "the same contact" isn't at all the same from different angles. That's where I struggle with the consistency concept.

Me too....obviously.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I guess my feeling is the crew needs to get all the plays right, not just each official calling their own game.

How can you be sure that you're getting a call right if you pre-determine that call?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

How can you be sure that you're getting a call right if you pre-determine that call?

Where did I say a call is pre-determined?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But when you judge that first bang-bang too-close-to-call crash a block, then if I have bang-bang too-close-to-call crash, it's gonna be a block. ....I'm going to try to remember that the really close one that could have gone either way was a block.

I don't follow this at all. In the first place, the expression "too close to call" doesn't work. There is no play that's too close to call. We have to make a call.
If you do have multiple plays in a game that are that close, there is no right and wrong, it depends on who you ask. Whether the last call was yours or your partner's, you must try to get this one right, and what the last call was has no part in the equation.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If you're doing the job properly, you're not making close block/charge calls...or any call.... in a vacuum. You're making the call as per what happened on that particular call ONLY, not on what happened on some call that might have occurred a half ago. Consistency doesn't mean that ALL close calls must be either a block or a charge. Doing it the way that you suggest is nothing but a cop-out imo. Any official who has become competent, proficient and experienced at a certain level is good enough to make any call based solely on the merits of that call only. They are also as equally competent, experienced and efficient to deal with the consequences of the calls that they make.

Imo you are giving way too little credit to the majority of officials out there who are good enough to pick out the subtle differences in what might appear to be similar calls, but are are actually quite different...maybe because a defender might have slightly leaned sideways at the very last second, or something similar to that. And only one official on the floor might be in a position to pick out that subtle difference. Does that mean that he's still not supposed to make the right call because all previous calls have been charges?

Sorry, but I don't agree with the "perception is reality" school of officiating. I believe that reality is reality.

I missed the part where I said all calls get called one way or another. And my post was not limited to block/charges, in fact I referenced contact in the post. Many foul calls are judgement and if the crew isn't on the same page as what they deem incidental and/or marginal contact then there are going to be problems.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

How can you be sure that you're getting a call right if you pre-determine that call?

Actually, let me re-phrase that. There are a lot of calls that are pre-determined.
- If a defender contacts a shooter's arm, and that contact affects the shot, I'm pre-determining that's a foul, every time.
- If a defender puts a hand on a dribbler, and that contact affects the path of the dribbler, I'm pre-determining that's a foul, every time.
- If a player, while holding the ball, lifts their pivot foot before releasing the ball to start a dribble, I'm pre-determining that's a violation, every time.

However,
- If B1 establishes LGP, and A1 contacts B1 and knocks them to the ground during a drive down the lane, my partner is calling a player/team control on A1. Then on the next possession, B1 drives down the lane while A1 trys to get in the path, but doesn't succeed; B1 knocks down A1, so now I've got a blocking foul on A1. Even though they were "similar" plays, they were not the same play, so they won't get the same call.

Don't get hung up on pre-determining calls. Maybe the proper terminolgy should be making sure the crew is using the same judgement in making calls. If all the officials use the same judgement, the crew will be consistent.

[btaylor64]

ok let me ATTEMPT to polish up what I said:

I'm assuming, for the most part, in regards to this thread and the topic everyone is thinking about block/charge plays:

If you have never had a block/charge play where the offensive player has started his upward shooting motion and the defender is so close to being in place to take a charge and it was so bang bang that you barely had time to blink then god bless you! This is the type of play i'm thinking of in regards to this thread. Do they happen that often in a game? No they don't but when it does happen, you're game awareness has to be at a level where you can go back through your play recall list and remember that "nutcutter" that we had earlier in the 2nd period and be able to apply it to this play in the 4th.

I love the thought process that most people have about judging each play on its own merit, that is great and i believe in it. If some people thought that a block/charge was hard and you thought it was not a 50/50 play by any means, then by all means call it like you see it and I believe this should be the way it is way way more often than not.

JR, in regards to your play about the player slightly leaning:

I believe this does not fall under the 50/50 play principle. If you judge he leans in or over to take the hit then that's what you have, but if he is straight up and totally legal and the only question is whether he was there in time before upward shooting motion started then I believe this would fall under that principle.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

JR, in regards to your play about the player slightly leaning:

I believe this does not fall under the 50/50 play principle. If you judge he leans in or over to take the hit then that's what you have, but if he is straight up and totally legal and the only question is whether he was there in time before upward shooting motion started then I believe this would fall under that principle.

?????
When the shooting motion starts is not a factor in determining who is responsible for contact; it only determines whether a defensive foul (if in fact the foul is defensive) is a shooting foul.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

?????
When the shooting motion starts is not a factor in determining who is responsible for contact; it only determines whether a defensive foul (if in fact the foul is defensive) is a shooting foul.

Snaqs,

This is incorrect. You are thinking of continuous shooting motion. Upward shooting motion is used to determine if a defender has obtained a LGP prior to the upward shooting motion of the off. Player. If he is there before USM then it is an offensive foul, if not then it is a block. I hope this doesn't divert our debate. This is the best debatable thread I've seen in a while!

[BillyMac]

Part of my pregame conference with my partner:

Consistency
Let’s see if we can call the same game. Be consistent with each other. If I have a very close block/charge play and I call a blocking foul, then the next time you have a similar block/charge play, you should have a blocking foul. Let’s try to remember what we’ve called earlier in the game, and what we haven’t called. Be consistent with what has already happened in the game.

Last Two Minutes
We’re not calling anything in the last two minutes if we haven’t already called it earlier in the game, unless it’s so blatant that it can’t be ignored. We don’t want our first illegal screen to be called with 30 seconds left in the game; but if the illegal screen puts a player into the first row of the bleachers, then we have to call it. Let’s not put the whistles away in the last two minutes: That wouldn’t be consistent with the way we’ve been calling the game. If the game dictates it, let the players win or lose the game at the line. We don’t want to be the ones who decide the game by ignoring obvious fouls just to get the game over.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Snaqs,

This is incorrect. You are thinking of continuous shooting motion. Upward shooting motion is used to determine if a defender has obtained a LGP prior to the upward shooting motion of the off. Player. If he is there before USM then it is an offensive foul, if not then it is a block. I hope this doesn't divert our debate. This is the best debatable thread I've seen in a while!

Sorry, but Snaqs is correct. Upward, sideways, downwards or any other direction of motion is not relevant to judging whether or not a defender was in position in time. What you needed to write was "before the offensive player goes airborne." Whether he has begun his shooting motion or not has no impact upon whether the foul is offensive or defensive.
Snaqs rightly chastised you for your incorrect phrasing.