Of course, I agree.

However, I also agree with M&M. You should call <b>ALL</b> no doubters against <b>both</b> teams from the beginning to the end of every game. If there is <b>ANY</b> doubt about <b>ANY</b> call, you shouldn't be making that call. That's called "guessing".

I don't think Welmer would disagree with that either. Saying that we should make sure that our first call in a game against either team is a no-doubter is a pretty standard philosophy at all levels.

Personally, I disagree with any philosophy that gets into worrying about any calls that might be made differently between the home and visiting teams. Call consistency is much more important imo.

Out of sheer curiosity, mu4scott, what level do you officiate?

Before he replies, let's find out if he's from SoCal.

Huh???
I’m not disagreeing with you about anything. I asked for your opinion. You don’t want to say anything and I suspect it’s because you don’t agree with it. I’ve heard his talks multiple times and he has philosophies on end of half, beginning of second half, end of game etc…. Don’t duck out by saying I “took it out of context”.

I’m just curious if you agree with it?

Didn't pull anything out of context.

We should work a game together.

You would be wrong again. I just do not feel like explaining it to you based on what I actually heard him say. And I do not want to debate with you anymore about what game management is or what it is not. Many people tried to explain that to you and it is clear you did not understand what they were saying. Then you chalked it up to typos and other stuff that people were not saying.

You will stay curious.

If you want an answer and the statements were clearly incomplete, then yes, they are out of context. Once again, I have heard him talk about this topic 3 times and there was a lot more to the statements before what was recorded and a lot afterwards.

No, because you would not know how to manage the game. ;)

Peace

I think some of us are missing the point.

First of all, it is impossible for all of our calls to be strong or right. The best officials in the NBA are wrong under 1% of the time proven statistically.

The point is, we need to be aware that especially in big games with hostile environments, certain coaches think they are going to get jobbed by the officials. They are all paranoid. So we need to be aware of this and not start the night off by sticking a garbage foul on a player right out of the gate. This is a good way to invite trouble into your game. In a perfect world, there would be no such things as garbage fouls, but they happen since none of us are perfect.

You seem to be doing better than your counterpart that started this thread.

Peace

Where might I find something that will back up that particular statement?

I thought that the NBE had released data stating that after evaluation their officials were accurate on about 93% of all calls.

He would then automatically be in the magical Land Of College And Above.:D

Unfortunately, I don't believe the NBA makes this public knowledge. I have heard Ed Rush speak before and he mentioned that Javie and Crawford are near the top at 97%. I do know the NBA analyzes every game and grades calls and no-calls as either correct or incorrect and each official will get a percentage score at the end of the year also broken down by calls by position.

I heard the ACC instituted a similar system and the funny thing was the crew chiefs were necessarily the best play-callers, yet finished the highest on the coach's ratings. This should point out how important acceptance and familiarity are in the paranoid mind of the coaches.

So if the top guys are right 97% of the time, how do you come up with your "less than 1%"? Not a math major, were ya?

But is is any more acceptable to stick this garbage foul on one team than the other? I for one say NO. Actually, this may be unthinkable to those with a college and above mentality or some other concept that I don't profess to understand, but which team is the home team or the visiting team is not something that I am interested in during the game.

The visiting team and coach are more paranoid than the home team. They are usually travel weary, have had the fans jeering them since warmups, and now have 3 officials that the coach has never seen work before......

Unfortunately, there is some truth to the "hometown cooking" syndrome. I once had an official tell me he called his block/charges for the hometeam because he had them 3 more times on the schedule. This is wrong......... however, the majority of officials are fair and this guy's career will never progress from where he's at.

Even at the collegiate level, there is jockeying going on. North Carolina played BYU in a tournament last year in Vegas and wouldn't play with the Mountain West officials (who normally work BYU games) and so a Pac-10 crew was brought in last minute.

So, I try really hard not to do anything to fuel any perception of unfairness. One thing I try to do is never spend more time with a home coach during introductions. That is a sure way to start building a negative perception.

This is a very broad statement which is not necessarily true.

Sound like personal problems to me. Actually sounds kinda like being an official.


Actually, depending on the level, either coach may or may not have seen the officials before.

So you propose to make up for this by being extra careful not to make a call against the visitors, particularly at the start of the game.

Wow, you get one dumba$$ and project that out to "some truth to...." I've had a lot of partners, but I've never had this guy. This is a crappy thing to think and a stupid thing to say; but how many officials out there go the opposite way so they "appear to be fair?"
Just because one knucklehead has an asinine philosophy doesn't make it right to adopt the equal and opposite reaction.

It's worse than make-up-calls, IMO, because you're making up for calls you not only didn't make or didn't see, but you don't even know for sure that they happened to this particularly visiting coach.