T'able offense?
 

Yeah, yeah I know this is men's rec league, and this stuff is to be expected but I still need help in knowing if my T was justified last night.

I have a history with this particular team. Their captain has it made up in his mind that I have it out for his team and will screw them over at every opportunity. I asked the rec league commissioner to not schedule me for their games, but last night they needed someone to fill in and I agreed not looking at the schedule and not wanting to leave someone hanging.

So, early on in the game my partner and I are trying to clean up hacking and reaching in on the perimeter. There were a lot of fouls called, on both teams. I called two quick fouls on this captain. The first one, he raises his hand in the air, claiming the foul. The second one, he glares at me while I'm taking the ball out of bounds. I ignore him.

The rest of the players pick up on the fact that my partner and I are calling fouls on reaching in and hacking, handchecking on the perimeter. They adjust their play. The captain does not. He continues his aggressive defense and I call him for a third foul. It sucks, yes, to have called three fouls on this guy, all from me, in the first half. But my hands are tied as...well...he keeps fouling.

Now he's really getting steamed. He glares at me hard core and just keeps muttering "unbelievable" for everyone to hear. I ignore him again and go back to my business.

Two plays later an opponent of his grabs a rebound and the captain comes over top of him and whacks his arm, sending the ball out of bounds. I call another foul. He huffs and puffs and goes over to the scorers table after I report the foul.

I thought he was subbing out, but apparently not as he comes walking directly towards me and says "Good job, buddy. That's 4."

He has, in past games, directly accused me of calling fouls on his team to favor the opposing team.

So I whack him. 5 fouls, he's gone. He grabs his stuff, walks right past me and yells "Well, you got what you wanted."

The first three fouls were completely justified, IMO. The fourth foul...well, it was borderline, I guess, I could have just called out of bounds but he didn't touch the ball at all, and he hit his arm, causing the ball to go out of bounds. So, it was either out of bounds on the opposing team or a foul (his 4th). A crappy situation but I think I handled it the best I could.

I appreciate your feedback.

IMO, that's a T starting at competitive 3rd grade girls rec leagues and upwards. Good call.

It sounds from your description as though the only things he said about the fouls were "unbelievable" and the "good job" line. It doesn't sound profane or abusive to me. It's obviously disrespectful to a degree, but I think that personally I would not have given the T.

I think you may have had a chance to head the whole situation off by addressing him after the "unbelievable" comments: "Look, I'm not out to get you, but I'm not going to put up with your commentary." Something like that might have helped the situation.

Of course, I don't know you or him, and maybe addressing him directly would've given him an excuse to explode at you. Only you were there to know about that.

Having said all that, it's men's league and you should put up with zero BS.

It's the player's job to adjust to the officiating. As long as you're consistent, no one should have any complaints.

Just keep calling 'em...and dumping him. Don't let him intimidate you, which is what he is trying to do. He's a typical rec league warrior, is all. Don't worry about him.

I hear you. I just gave up on trying to reason with him last year. I had those types of conversations with him and his teammates, but it didn't do any good, so I just ignore them and T'em up if they cross over the line.

Then I have zero problem with the T. There's a time for talk and a time to blow the whistle, and if you know that the talking won't help. . .

Just a couple questions:
1. Did you & your partner switch after fouls?
2. Do you attempt to talk the players out of fouls/violations? ie; easy... straight... hands... lane, etc.

1. Yeah, in fact we made a point to talk about that at the beginning of the game. A lot of times we tend to get a little lazy because it's rec league, but with this team we made sure to switch. I just had the luck of being in position to call the fouls.
2. Every single night I utter the phrase "Don't use your hands to (fill in the blank)" about a thousand times. Last night was no different.

I'm convinced this guy is just out to be a martyr at this point.

I hate when that happens, we switch & I still end up making the call on the same team/player. Sometimes it is what it is...

Some guys just don't belong on the wood. Way 2 take care of buisness!!

Sounds like the opposite of Homearama - WHACK A RAMA!!!!! Good job!

Thanks for all the feedback.

One of the things that really amuses me is how these players actually think that I could give a crap who wins these meaningless games. :confused:

It's not meaningless to them. Just something to keep in mind. Might be small time to the officials, but for some of those players, the most exciting thing they do all week.

I know I looked forward to Wednesday nights when I played in mens leagues... and boy was I bad to the refs :(
Just like the no-skilled 8th grade girls games I worked last night... it meant the world to them.

Glad you addressed that JS 20, we should treat them all the same as far as respecting the GAME & it's participants.
But I'm certain this is what fiasco really meant:

One of the things that really amuses me is how these players actually think that I could give a crap who wins these meaningless games.

Given everything you've said, looks justified to me. I wouldn't ask off his games, though.

Some times, you just have to play whack-a-mole until the moles all go away.

Yeah I hear you.

I treat them the same. It just blows me away sometimes how seriously they take it. But I try to take my job seriously, so...

I say yes, and I only had to read this far. :cool:

One thing you cannot control is somebody else's attitude. If you're calling it consistently, and he won't adjust, well, you can't fix stubborn, paranoid, lazy, no game, or stupid.

Nevertheless, I'm going to ask: Were you and your partner really on the same page in trying to clean this up? Did he call as many fouls as you? Why didn't your partner have a single foul on this guy? From the details you've given, I'd surmise either you were looking for fouls on this guy, knowing his tendencies; or your partner left you twisting in the wind instead of helping you out, either by picking up one or more of the fouls that were there, or by not forcing a switch, or no-switch, when it was obvious you two were having issues.

I agree with trying to stay off his games. There's clearly a history. If there's enough other games to keep you busy, there's no need to be there.

Meaningless ???
 

Agree. And, the game shouldn't be meaningless to you either.

This is part of my pregame conference with my partner, every game:
Every game is the most important game being played anywhere tonight for these kids, fans, and coaches. Let’s make sure we officiate the game keeping that in mind, through effort, and attitude.

Also, good call on the technical foul. He deserved it

While I understand the sentiment, and the desire to motivate yourself to give your best effort, this "most important game" statement just isn't necessarily true. There are truly recreational leagues. There are leagues of little kids who will forget the game as soon as the horn sounds and move on to the swings at the playground (or the X-Box at home). Even at the high school level, there are games where one team knows going in that it's going to get crushed. They want to play well, but they know the game isn't all that important.

At a lot of venues, the game is more important to the coaches and parents than it ever will be to the kids.

If you give another one here, you won't hear me complain about it.

I was thinking the same thing.

In a Adult Men's Rec League where he's already headed out the door? It would have served no purpose. The tech and the disqualification sent the message loud and clear, IMO.

This is the first thing I thought of when reading OP. What did your partner have to say? Are other officials refusing to do this jerk's
games as well?

A lot of the other officials are buddy-buddy with all the guys in the league. Go way back, you know? So they put up with a lot more crap than I do, or I get more crap than they do since the players don't know me. Either way, I don't really care how they officiate, and they know how I officiate. They know that I don't put up with players' attitudes. (Later that same night as the OP, I tossed a kid who followed me to the scorer's table as I assessed his first technical foul and then stayed on me as I tried to walk away from him. My partner did nothing.)

To be honest, I wonder if a lot of the guys who ref in this league are in it just for the paycheck. They call what they need to call to "get the job done" but other than that, they don't want to ruffle feathers.

I made a point to switch on every foul in that game, especially after I called two straight fouls on the guy. My partner was calling plenty of fouls himself, just not on this guy. I would not be surprised in the least if this player was intentionally being more aggressive in front of me in order to get 4 fouls so he could mouth off to me and dare me to toss him.

Methinks you're giving him too much intellectual credit, my friend.

Gee, ya think? :) It's a men's rec league. I know very few officials who do those leagues because they're trying to improve. A few, but very few.

Well, it IS an opportunity to work on one's "people" skills. ;)

Exactly, if you can manage a mens game with 10-15 knuckleheads participating, it makes managing a HS game with 2-4 knuckleheads much more easy... for me anyway.

There's always something we can improve on, no matter the level of play.

The purpose would be to let this guy know that even though he is through for the day, he still needs to know how to act as long as he is in the building.

Yep. I'm sure this added bit of teaching will bear much fruit. Unless he's a typical wreck league numbskull. Oh, you're right, that IS redundant.

The fruit could be nothing more than a suspension or fine from the recleague masters. 2 Ts often means suspension in these leagues.

It could be nothing more than your satisfaction that you made the right call.

Worst case, the league officials don't assign you any more of this particular knucklehead's games.

Regardless, no sleep lost.

Somebody at camp this summer put into words something I think we all know inherently. One important, but often unappreciated, aspect of using a T to control a game is then allowing the situation to dissipate.

The guy isn't escalating. He just wants to get in one last jab before he goes. Why not let him have the last word? About 13 more steps, and the click of the closing gym door, and it's over. Why not just let it be over and get on with the game?

Will it make the game better to toss one more T his way? You know, as a parting gift? Seems to me it would just be piling on, and reinforcing the illusion that the OP really is out to get him. After all, why only give the guy 5 fouls when you can give him 6?

As for his rec league masters...was there something in his words or behavior that actually warrants "further action"? Were they so out of line that he deserves a fine or suspension?

Regardless, no sleep lost.

So, since this guy is grabbing his bag and heading for the door, he gets a free pass? If he'd waited a moment, sat on his bench, and said the same thing as you walked past him, would you T him up? I would have.

Maybe the T here shows the other players that they don't get a free shot just because they've already been DQ'd. Allowing a free shot isn't allowing the situation to dissipate, it's setting up future escalation.

No, neither T would normally justify further action, IMO, but combined, they're easily an ABS situation. Do we hold back on 2nd Ts just because nothing said for the 2nd one really, by itself, earns a report to the state or conference?

In my corner of the world throwing a 2nd T in this situation in a Men's Rec League would not serve any purpose. ""Well, you got what you wanted" is very mild. Especially considering that this person is voluntarily leaving the building for his 5th foul (4 personals and a 'T') when there was no requirement to.

Wouldn't there be additional FTs attempted for the 2nd T? This is generally when his teammates turn on him & tell him to "shut up" because he is costing them.
Also, in these parts 3 Ts on one team = ballgame.

As I said, he is already walking out the building voluntarily. He's not dropping 'F'-bombs, he's not holding up play, he's not getting in your face. Let him go. "Well, you got what you wanted", sh!t he'll probably catch flak from his teammates for whining like a little punk.

Yeah, I agree that the comment wasn't that bad & he's also on his way out.

But like Ali said "take this with you"!

It sends a clear message to all participants & even the guys getting ready for the next game... the officials aren't having it tonight, whether you're on the court or on your way out the door.

Plus when the team is 1 T away from a forfeit they tend to become well behaved & respectful.

BNR - Not trying to debate with you, JMO. I respect your stance on it as well!

Snaqs, it's pretty rare when I totally disagree with of your posts. But I do in this case.

"So, since this guy is grabbing his bag and heading for the door, he gets a free pass?" I'll come back to this one.

"If he'd waited a moment, sat on his bench, and said the same thing as you walked past him, would you T him up? I would have." But he didn't. A different situation may require a different way of addressing it. But this wasn't a different situation.

"Maybe the T here shows the other players that they don't get a free shot just because they've already been DQ'd."

Okay, to the meat of my disagreement. If you have to start this sentence with the word "maybe" it tells me you're searching for a justification to fit your point of view. If the justification for ejecting somebody isn't obvious, should you really be ejecting? I don't think so. I don't really think you do either.

The word "shows" disturbs me too. To me, in this context, this has just one meaning, as in "I'm gonna show 'em!", a phrase that inevitably flows from a sense of having received a personal insult or injury. Where was the insult or injury here? That the player didn't agree with the foul calls? The official is the authority figure, he has the whistle and the T. If giving the guy a T for his fifth foul isn't "show" enough, how much "showing" is enough? And what exactly are you trying to "show"? To whom? And why?

And then there's the use of the phrases "free pass" and "free shot". Are you sure you're not taking this just a tad personally?

"Allowing a free shot isn't allowing the situation to dissipate, it's setting up future escalation."

I just flat out disagree with this. Allowing a coach, player, wife, teenage daughter, etc. to have the last word in an argument that you've "won" is usually very de-escalating. You made your point; they made theirs. It's not exactly rational, this need on their part to score some final point in a losing battle, but it makes them feel better about losing. As long as compliance follows, and the "last word" isn't threatening, obscene, escalating, etc., let them have the last word and move on.

And if, in this case, it leads to future escalation (I assume you mean by that player in a future game), then at that point you've got your clear justification for ejecting him.

"No, neither T would normally justify further action, IMO, but combined, they're easily an ABS situation. Do we hold back on 2nd Ts just because nothing said for the 2nd one really, by itself, earns a report to the state or conference?"

IMO it is a different situation where there's a "state" or "conference" involved, as opposed to a wreck league. But even in the HS game, where the state has a vested interest in backing the official, the notion of a justifiable ejection is important to an official's career. Would "further review" of the ejection you propose, considering the known history between these two, show the ejection to be clearly justifiable? Or will it merely look like somebody trying to "show" somebody?

BITS, I think we're in more agreement than not. I'm really fleshing this thing out more than trying to argue a point or justify a point of view. I'm still not sure, and perhaps it's because I'm seeing (and hearing) this differently in my head than you are.

If it's a quiet comment on his way by, I agree with letting him walk on this. Then it's a last word issue. However, I was picturing a final "shot" quite a bit louder and angry, sort of a "well, I'm already done, may as well tell him how I feel." Upon further review, I think it was most likely the quieter scenario.

That's not at all what I meant, and it's not the only meaning allowed by the context. In rec ball, letting players walk all over you shows other players they can do the same. Taking care of business shows them it won't be tolerated. It has nothing to do with some sort of sick power trip or vendetta.

And by "free shot" I simply meant to portray this as how I envisioned it; like a MLB manager who's just been ejected for balls-and-strikes deciding he may as well get his money's worth. Depending on the volume and tone, I'm not sure where the OP fits.

Was it a conciliatory tone or a combative scream? Most likely, it was somewhere in the middle.
No, I mean by the other players in the same game. Each game is new, IMO, so I'm not concerned with that for this game. I picture other players seeing him get away with a few choice parting words and thinking they can do the same.

I started to compare it to a hs game, but realize that's not fair. It's wreck ball, my point was we don't have a different standard for a first T than for the 2nd just because the 2nd removes him from the game. If the player does something that earns him a T, then turns around later and does the same exact thing, you ding him both times even though nothing he did by itself warrants an ejection. NFHS (for one) has determined that in this case, ABS warrants ejection.

This is the salient point, IMO. I did the former last year, my first year in this league. They walked all over me last year. I tried to get it under control late in the season, but that certainly didn’t work.

This year, I decided to nip it in the bud early...meaning my first game. I’ve given 7 technical fouls in 12 games so far this year. And I really do think they’ll start going down as the season goes along. If not, no sweat. I have no problem handing them out all day long until the players learn I’m not putting up with their crap.

The thing is, when you start handing out Ts, one of three things happens.

1. Players adjust and the games become more pleasant to work. (likely)
2. Players get disqualified, and each game becomes more pleasant to work after the business is handled. (equally likely)
3. Assigners stop giving you the games. (less likely)

All of the above are preferable to putting up with the BS all season long. Sometimes, you just have to play whack-a-mole in these leagues.

That said, none of this really says for sure whether the 2nd T should have been called. It's situational, and I wasn't there.

If it helps, he didn't say it loud enough for the whole gym to hear. Just loud enough for me and the people around us at the time.

I got the sense that his teammates were pissed off at me for calling the T, but equally pissed off at him for running his mouth, so I thought it better to just let him have the last word.

Yeah, it helps. It means BITS is right.

dammit!

Edited to say: I won. I'll let Snaqs have the last word. :)

Sorry! :D

Important vs. Meaningless ???
 

OK. I can agree with some of what you say. Maybe some games are more important to me than other games, but, nevertheless, they still are all important. I was fortunate to work a high school varsity post season league semifinal, and a final, this past season, and I was a little more excited about working those, than I was about working my Catholic elementary school games. In addition, if the game is more important to the coaches, and parents, than it is to the kids, then don't the coaches, and parents, deserve our best effort?

We are getting paid to do a job, and many of us are fortunate enough to get well paid for some of the low level games that we do. A Forum member refereed to a "Paycheck Official" a few weeks ago in a post. That will never be me. I do it for a lot of reasons, including, but not limited to, the money, as well as trying to give something to the game that I have so much enjoyed for over forty years.

No matter what the level, I always give it my best effort. Furthermore, I have never worked a "meaningless" game in twenty-seven years, and if I ever do, that's when I hang up my whistle.

Billy, somewhere along the way, you switched what you're talking about. Your original comment, and what I disagreed with was:

You were not talking about games that were important to you for some reason. You stated that the game was "the most important game being played anywhere" to the kids. That's just fiction. Have you ever worked a game on the same night that Duke/UNC is on ESPN? The kids (some of the boys, anyway) can't WAIT to get the game over so they can go watch the big boys.

Of course they do, and I never said otherwise. The fact that the game isn't the most important game in the world at that moment doesn't mean that we're not going work hard.

Again, I never said anything about any game being meaningless. I just don't like this mystical importance that you're attaching to every game. It's melodramatic, and I understand it's for a reason (motivation to do your best), but it's just not true.

Not to be a **** stirrer, but many games not only don't even require our best efforts, there's no way to give it. The level of effort that's required for a high level JV game, or a rural school varsity, is way beyond what's required, necessary, or many times even possible in 4th grade boys game.

Perspective. It's a good thing. ;)

I Always Wanted To Be Number Six ...
 

You're correct, but I had no intention of attributing the word meaningless to you. Sorry. I put it in quotes because it was used by the original poster in post #11.

Also, maybe it's different for different kinds of kids, in general, or for kids today, but when I was a kid playing basketball, whether it was in a friend's driveway, with no officials, or in a gym, with officials, coaches, and a crowd, I was only excited about that game, at that time. I used to pretend that I was Bill Russell, my favorite player, blocking shots, grabbing rebounds, scoring a few points, and then go home after my game and watch the Celtics on ABC's Sunday afternoon NBA Game of the Week.

I always gave it my best effort as a player, even with my limited skills, and I always give it my best effort as an official, as I'm sure you do, based on your reputation as a top high school official, an NCAA Division I official, and a highly respected member of this Forum.

What's ABS stand for?

ABS = Accumulation of Bull S***

Ahh rec leagues. There is nothing quite like it. Sorry for being a late comer to this conversation, been working some late games and come home too tired to browse the forum.

Anyways, from my perspective I definitely would have given the player a T and maybe even before you did. My problem with Rec leagues is that I am 19, and I look it. I've been doing games since I was 16 and worked my way up to JV so far, with the occasional off season Varsity game but that doesn't mean squat to these players. I'm working games in Rec league where the players are anywhere from 5-30 years older than me. A lot of the players give me no respect due to my age and appearance so because of this I have developed what I think is one of the quicker technicals around. I have to, otherwise the players will try and run all over me. After the players get to know me and see that I won't put up with any sh!t, we tend to get along fine. Still, there are always the idiots who seem to resent or can't handle the fact that someone of my age has been put in charge of their game.

So my point being, yes I would have given him a T when you did but I probably would have given him one sooner. But that's just me. Anyone have any thoughts on it?

You're from San Diego and you have been officiating for 3 years and you are young. Why haven't you made it to D1 ball yet? :p

Back to OP. Would you have given a 2nd T when the player was headed out the door and made that comment about the official "getting what you wanted."?

Cause I don't know the right people apparently ;)