Call Consistency as a Crew

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

if one knows the rule and knows how to appky it, one should not have any problems in making the call no matter how close it is. Besides, if the block/charge is that close, go with the charge.

Aren't these two statements kind of at odds? You're saying you should have no problem. And you're also saying that there are plays that are a problem, so go charge. That seems a little contradictory.

And by the way, why hasn't this response generated debate from Jurassic? Jurassic, you're all bent out of shape about trying to call these plays like your partner. Just referee the damn play, right? Well, how is "just call it a charge" any better than "call it the same way as your partner"?

[zeedonk]

As another who is just finishing my first full year, this thread has been great, and has reminded me about just how much advice (good and bad) that I have been given this year.

I have officiated from 3-4th grade kiddies to HS boys JV (this is not news to you veterans). I have tried to make it a point to cover the question of "how close do we want to call the game" question in pregame with my partners. By that I mean, are we calling all travels in the 3-4th grade game? At my level, I think it's still a relevant question to ask the veteran partner, even though the proper answer is that we aren't making adjustments to level of play- a foul is a foul etc...


The quality responses have come from the veteran officials whose judgment and advice I have come to respect during the year from working with them and seeing them as well. That advice was generally more specific- "We won't/can't call all travels at this level, but call the ones where allowing him/her to get away with it results in a basket or affects the play". Travelling outside the arc or where they are not in a position to score might not always be called.

The, um, less-quality responses (in my opinon) have been the ones where the partner says "let's see how it goes" or "don't change anything". Those were the games where we got into trouble because neither of us were on the same page in types of calls to make, and for whatever reason, we couldn't get together on the same page. I then went to my default position, and called the game as I saw it, without regard for what my partner has or hasn't done, other than to know that one of us is going to get guff from coaches for not being consistent. As communication was lacking, the game suffered. Those were the games where I thought I was on my own, my partner looked tired, disinterested and a little annoyed at having a first year partner.

Moving up levels, the best advice I have been given has been to just "call the game". For the less experienced amongst us, it is difficult to determine which player or age of player can absord what amount of contact (the "play through it" theory). I hated playing in games with "ticky tack" foul calls and I don't want to be the guy who calls inconsequential contact.

sorry for the rambing post... I'll stop now.

Z

[Adam]

Originally Posted by zeedonk

By that I mean, are we calling all travels in the 3-4th grade game? At my level, I think it's still a relevant question to ask the veteran partner, even though the proper answer is that we aren't making adjustments to level of play- a foul is a foul etc...

I think it's a great question in this context, and I don't necessarily agree with your "proper answer."

"A foul is a foul" is really misleading. The same contact that is a foul in 7th grade may well not be a foul in 9th grade. It takes a lot less contact at lower levels to create an advantage than it does in high school.

Also, I will adjust to level of play with regard to travels and other violations when we're at the middle school level or below. I tend to apply advantage/disadvantage to violations at this level. There are some officials, however, who disagree with this, so it's good to communicate early and get on the same page.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

And by the way, why hasn't this response generated debate from Jurassic? Jurassic, you're all bent out of shape about trying to call these plays like your partner. Just referee the damn play, right? Well, how is "just call it a charge" any better than "call it the same way as your partner"?

Geeze, calm down, Skippy. Take a Midol or sumthin'. If it'll make you feel better, I'll agree that Mark's statement was just as dumb as yours.

Btw, I'm not "bent out of shape". I'm simply giving you my own point of view in my usual calm, cool and collected, laid back manner.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Btw, I'm not "bent out of shape".

That's not what I heard from Mrs. Jurassic.

At least we agree that "If it's close, go charge" is a bad guideline.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

At least we agree that "If it's close, go charge" is a bad guideline.

I didn't comment because I thought that went without saying.

Now to have a l'il more fun......

Would you say "If it's close, go charge" would be a good guideline if the last close call was a charge?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I didn't comment because I thought that went without saying.

Now to have a l'il more fun......

Would you say "If it's close, go charge" would be a good guideline if the last close call was a charge?

Depends - which partner made that last call?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Would you say "If it's close, go charge" would be a good guideline if the last close call was a charge?

Absolutely. That's what I've been saying all along. If it's too close to know for sure, try to remember how the last one went.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Aren't these two statements kind of at odds? You're saying you should have no problem. And you're also saying that there are plays that are a problem, so go charge. That seems a little contradictory.

And by the way, why hasn't this response generated debate from Jurassic? Jurassic, you're all bent out of shape about trying to call these plays like your partner. Just referee the damn play, right? Well, how is "just call it a charge" any better than "call it the same way as your partner"?

If it is a charge, call a charge. If it is a block, call a block. But if one were to video tape thousands upon thousands of bang bang block/charge calls, I will bet dollars to donuts that well over 95% will be charges, meaning when you absolutely have to call something, call a charge.

MTD, Sr.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

If it is a charge, call a charge. If it is a block, call a block. But if one were to video tape thousands upon thousands of bang bang block/charge calls, I will bet dollars to donuts that well over 95% will be charges, meaning when you absolutely have to call something, call a charge.

I've had a number of people tell me that it's fun to work with me because I'm not afraid to call the PC. You're exactly right: it is what it is. Just be able to back up your decision if asked about the call.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I've had a number of people tell me that it's fun to work with me because I'm not afraid to call the PC. You're exactly right: it is what it is. Just be able to back up your decision if asked about the call.

Jugs:

That is the problem, far too many officials afraid to call the charge and worse don't know the rule and how to apply it correctly.

MTD, Sr.

[icallfouls]

I took some time off from this thread since its inception.

So let me get this straight. Some people here are saying on block/charge plays (bang-bang) that if the first one is a block, then the sceond one should also be a block?

So in the first qtr there is a big B/C call to make. I call a block and got the play right. Later in the game, who cares when, there is another bang-bang B/C call. For the sake of argument, this is a charge and we get the play right. Both plays went against the same team, but because we had an earlier bang-bang play we should call a block, even if it is wrong?! BTW, B/C plays aren't bang-bang plays, either LGP was established or it wasn't.

I liken this to a coach that just got a T, then they get a few calls in their favor. If the next play is against the same team, call it against the same team.

I rarely say this, but this time I agree with Jurassic.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

So let me get this straight. Some people here are saying on block/charge plays (bang-bang) that if the first one is a block, then the sceond one should also be a block?

I'm not sure if I'm counted on this side of the argument, but I would expand the explanation to say if in my partner's judgement, that first particular play was a block, and I get the same play in front of me later, my judgement should also consider that same play a block. Iow, the crew should have the same judgement on all plays.

Originally Posted by icallfouls

I rarely say this, but this time I agree with Jurassic.

Maybe you should look at his posts a little closer, you might agree with him more than just rarely.

I do agree with his simple logic in that all plays should be called on their own merit. However, simply saying "a block on one end will be a block on the other end" is also overly simplistic. Some people go into a game with differing levels of judgement. I might feel I can pass on certain contact because I didn't feel it caused an advantage, but my partner(s) might feel that same contact did cause an advantage, and therefore call the foul. I pass on the play at one end, my partner calls a foul on that same contact on the other end, and the result is an inconsistent crew. Whichever one of us is "correct", the other(s) should change their judgement to match. It can also be applied to block/charge calls, in that if we all know the rules and apply them them correctly, how could you not agree that a "block on one end is a block on the other"? If we as a crew don't all follow the same guidelines, I might call a charge on player who knocks over a defender who has LGP, but has one foot in the air, while my partner might feel having that one foot in the air does not constitute LGP. One end of the floor is a charge, the other end of the floor the same play is a block, and we have an inconsistent crew.

Does that make more sense?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

I rarely say this, but this time I agree with Jurassic.

In that case, I'm going to change my stance on it. I agree with Scrapper now.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

In that case, I'm going to change my stance on it. I agree with Scrapper now.

Oh.

In that case, I agree with Snaqs.