First 2 Block/Charge Philosophy
 

Hi all-

Struggling a little bit with the following:

My 2nd year (I keep telling y'all that)- as we are moving to better games the more senior officials have been advising us to pregame the first two block/charges of the game. Goes something like this- if I'm lead and I have a player control on my end and we go back down and you have something similar, you'd better be calling a player control foul as well...

OK, I get why- we don't want to start the game 1-looking like the 2 officials are on different pages and 2- giving one or both coaches reason to start getting on us for being inconsistent. Here's my problem- what if I get the second block/charge and it's a no-question not-even-close block? I'm supposed to tank the call so we look consistent? Even better, if I'm your partner, am I gonna get the business if I go with the block?

I'm pretty sure I'm adding that question to my pregame with veteran partners...

Thanks
Z

I disagree with this philosophy. If you see a block or charge, call it! I would not let my call ride on the last block/charge. If you see an obvious block and you call it a charge because that is what was called the last time down court, you are doing a disservice to your integrity.

-Josh

You don't tank the call. You make the call that needs to be made. in my pregames with newer officials, I use the hand check rule as an example for consistency. It is a call that some guys never make. I stress to my partners that if we call one on one end, let's make sure we call it the same way on the other.

There is a difference...
Similar plays called in a similar manner vs. 2 wrongs don't make it right

Zee, this is not the play we're talking about. We're talking about a bang-bang that is so close, it could go either way. We see these a lot. In fact, we've had a few videos posted over the last few months of exactly this type of play. We watch the play on video in slow motion 10 times and we still can't agree amongst ourselves if it's a block or PC.

That's the kind of play your veteran partners are talking about. We want all those plays (if there is more than one) to be the same outcome.

However, if I have a play where the defender has been a statue for 10 seconds and gets plowed over, and then 2 minutes later you have a play where the defender undercuts the shooter after he's airborne, we better darn well have different calls on those!! :)

I don't ever want you to "tank" a call because of something that I called earlier.

While I understand their thought process....ya can't just call a charge because your partner did. You as a "team" must be consistent. A block is a block and a charge is a charge.

As long as you are consistent, firm (not wishy washy), know what you saw, and know the difference, you should be able to explain to a coach, evaluator, etc. why you called what you did - AND most importantly, it wll be coinsistent with your partner(s).

As you point out the plays may be similar, but then again not so much. Me, I'm standing by my guns. JMO

When I first started to officiate I was told the same thing by senior officials. Their reasoning was if the play is close and you call it the same way -- the coaches get off your back. IT DIDN'T MATTER!!!

I tell younger officials to just officiate the game, apply the rules correctly, advantage/disadvantage. You are going to be right and sometime you are going to be wrong. Get into position. If it is charge sell it. If it is a block, sell it. (Sometimes the call doesn't need selling.)

There are officials who I work with still go by that philosophy and it is not teaching the game correctly to the inexperienced officials. I have even had some of the inexperienced officials tell me during pre-game that this is the way the have been told to do. Then, I have to de-program them.

[QUOTE=Scrapper1;551188]Zee, this is not the play we're talking about. We're talking about a bang-bang that is so close, it could go either way. We see these a lot.
That's the kind of play your veteran partners are talking about. We want all those plays (if there is more than one) to be the same outcome.QUOTE]


OK, that's what I thought. That makes much more sense than what I was worried about. Now I can add a note in my mind for the 1st quarter... "look for 1st block/charge call- what was it? look for same on my end"..

By the way, would it be correct to not worry about that call past the 1st quarter? What I mean is, if there are no PC fouls (or there is 1 but nothing else) am I still still looking for a 3rd Q bang-bang to go the same way my partner called in the 1st?

Consistent through the entire game. As my partner said to a coach at AAU this summer "We may suck, but we're consistent" :rolleyes:

The crew should strive for consistency throughout the entire game, first to third doesn't matter.

I've always been told a good way to look at these close calls, A block is a block and charge is a charge, anything in the middle, "tweeners", are charges, give the defense the benefit of the doubt if you have to guess! So if you have two tweeners, should have 2 charges, very consistent that way!

What we often pre-game is how to handle double whistles. We make eye contact, think about whose primary it is, and the other guy puts his hand down.

Takes 2 seconds and prevents the ugly "it's a block, no it's a charge" call. Disagreements about the call get handled in the locker room: on the floor we nod and say "good call."

Also why the mechanic is fist in air - followed by another signal. You see a lot more of these double different calls when officials whistle and go straight to the the signal w/o fist in air first.

here is what it is
 

We had this Saturday in a JUCO Game on consecutive trip in the first half and just a couple of trips a part in the second.

in the first half they were similar calls with the block on a airborne shooter second half they were both player control fouls for clearing out.

Similar plays - Similar calls that establishes your consistency.

If one is an obvious block and the other is an obvious Charge then call it that way because they aren't similar - but when they are similar call them in a similar manner and the coach has no standing to argue with you, "we called it the same way on the other end coach"

Consistency
 

From my pregame:

Consistency
Let’s see if we can call the same game. Be consistent with each other. 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.

Being as honest and forthright as I can. You're in your second year... you will be having a hard enough time as is to get plays right because you probably haven't seen enough and your play recall is just now starting to get plays filed away in your programmed brain.

Go out and get plays right and the other stuff like tempo, flow, cadence, consistency and feel will just come naturally and come even sooner the harder and more work you put into it. Good luck and just go out and get plays right.

I'm shocked. Shocked, I tell you to learn that btaylor just wrote something intelligent on this forum. ;)

Eh, my partner usually just points and I usually come out with a fist. We've NEVER had a blarge. It's timing and eye contact.

It's your second year. I do not think you're good enough yet to do anything but call what you see. And 22 years later, I still do the same thing.

Show off. :D

Nah, what I'm saying is that I'm not good enough to predetermine my calls.

I do give the benefit of the doubt on real coin-flippers to the defense. For a while it felt like we led the world in PC fouls, but most people have now caught up to us.

No where is anyone talking about predetermining calls. If it is a block it is a block - if it is PC it is PC.
What people are trying to get you to do is have consistency on similar plays at both ends of the floor that is all.
It will come in time, you will better understand the process, but if it is 100% a Block it is a Block you do not change it because you just had a PC foul at the other end.

Why does one have to think about it this way then?

See the call, make the call. Know the difference between a block and a charge. Just cause my partner kicks a block/charge at one end doesn't mean I'll do so at the other end in the name of "consistency," either.

"you will better understand the process"? If directed at me, it's condescending and poorly placed. If you are talking to someone else here, then I'll let them tell you that.

I do think this is one of the most talked about calls in basketball that is also one of the easiest to make. Did the defender have LGP? If so, ship it the other way. If not, it's a block. It's not that hard. It is possible to overthink the game.

The intent is not meant condecending - the process is to be consistent it is not just with Block/Charges - it is with Arm bars, hand checking, illegal screens. rebounding fouls the intent is that you as a crew are all calling similar palys in a similar manner at both ends of the floor.

The worst thing that can happen is that the baall comes down the court to your primary in the trail and the defender B1 hot stoves the defender and then does it again and you get them for the hand check.
Now you go the other way and with your partner in the trail and the player for team A does the same thing and your partner doesn't call it.
what are you going to hear when you get to the other end of the floor?

getting on the same page as a crew - comes with experience, which is usually why you do not have a crew with two or three officials who just got their licenses on the floor together working the league championships, they tend not to be seasoned enough - sometimes they are and that may be the case with you, to handle some of the suttleties of the game.
if you were offended sorry.

I personally think you are actually making it too easy.

In your easy interpretation a defender is allowed to first establish LGP and then "submarine" an alighted player? Also what if defender established LGP and then trys to take a charge by setting up his base wider than shoulder width and in the attempt of the offensive player to slip by him he makes contact with his extended leg and trips?

now in reverse order, what if the defender has not established LGP and on a drive to the basket the off. player alights and wipes the defender away with his off arm or leads with a leg or a knee to the sternum or groin?

As for the "submarine" sitch, are you addressing a shot attempt? If so, if the defender got there before the offensive player left his feet, contact in the torso, that is PC. As for your other sitch, the "approximately shoulder width" (4-40-2d) only applies in screening situations since, after establishing IGP, a guard can be moving to maintain guarding position. A trip has nothing to do with a PC/Block. A trip is a trip and is a foul on the defender.

On the reverse side, if the defender gets to a position first, and the offensive player hasn't jumped before he got there, and contact is in the torso, that is still PC. As for the knee to the sternum or groin, it depends what you are asking. If it is simply in the act and is not deliberate or intentional, and again, the defender was there before he left the ground, PC. As for the arm, again, it depends on intent and how it happened.

Imho, PC/block is not all that difficult to call if you observe the whole play. Again, imho, traveling, with the speed and ability of today's players is much more difficult.

And I just officiate what comes to me. If it's a classic block/charge, LGP or not is enough. If it's an undercut, submarine, etc., etc. I just officiate the play.

What we do requires judgment, timing, a feel for the game, and experience to know what to do, but this ain't brain surgery.

Time to take the afternoon off to get ready for the start of my season. Going to hit the hot tub, the elliptical for a bit, and the hot tub again.

good luck have a great season.

Sounds like a subliminable message to me. :D

I am talking about a player leaving the floor and the defender after establishing LGP he ducks and undercuts the guy rather than taking a legitimate hit....

In the other play I'm saying a player is leaving the floor toward the hoop and makes contact with the defender who is unnaturally wider than normal.

On the reverse side, I will have to disagree with you... We as referees should not referee intent. Reffing intent can only get you in trouble. How do you explain it to a coach? "Coach, I know what he was trying to do" or "Coach, I know what his intent was and it was unsportsmanlike" You think that is going to go over well with him. Point being don't ref intent, referee the play on its own merits.

As far as the arm and leg... these are unatural moves and overt in nature and should supercede a player not having LGP. When a player "wipes out" with his off arm when a player is legitimately trying to block a shot, that is advantageous for the offensive player and leading with a leg or knee is also advantageous and a very overt move.

Rich, I honestly do not mean to be condescending, but perhaps you missed my first post in this thread.

Most of the time, your view is valid. But there are those calls that are so close, they could very reasonably go either way. We've seen several videos of these on the site in the last couple months. These are the plays that we're talking about. We want all these plays (if there is more than one in the game) to be called the same.

The "classic" block/charges that you mention are not really what we're talking about when we discuss having the same call at both ends.

And this is my underlying attitude- I've still got too much going on, especially the beginning of the game, to have to remember a play 2 minutes or 2 quarters ago and to try to do the same. I'm OK with the theory of "be consistent on bang-bang calls" but I have to admit, if I'm not reminding myself of it before I get to my position on the lead, chances are I'm gonna see it, call it, report it and THEN I might remember what my partner called and cringe... hopefully before the coach remembers and tries to blast me for it.

And on the coaches complaining about it, I don't care. Maybe next year or even later on this year, I will care, but not now. "Coach I saw it clearly" is about all I'll say. Nothing about the last call...

I say put all this out of your head. The last call has no bearing on the next call.

Plain and Simple
 

We can debate this for years, but in the end there is only 1 answer -- Call it as you see it. If you see a block, call a block. If you see a Player Control foul, call a PC foul. If you see a travel, call a travel.

Yet we all agree that these are judgment calls and that we may all judge them differently. With the inevitable variation, you and your partner could end up calling a very different game if you don't make an effort to pay attention to how your partner is calling the game or even what you've previously called. Having a clear inconsistency among a crew never leads to a good place. The same play should be the same call throughout the game.

When your partner has previously called 5 blocks on what were essentially the same contact against team B, you, having the very same type of contact with the teams in reverse, would be ill advised to call a charge against team B. It doesn't matter if you think it should be a charge and think all 5 of your partner's calls were marginal. The pattern has been well established....don't change it. Be consistent as a crew.