More thoughts from John Adams

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by stripes

Only thing that stood out to me was the comment about watching the players and they will tell you if you got the play right.

This was one of the things that raised my eyebrows. This sounds, frankly, like a coach's perspective, not an official's perspective. I think that in the vast majority of cases, the players have no idea if you got the play right. Players and coaches almost always look astonished that you could have possibly called a foul on that play. There are, of course, obvious plays where everybody in the gym knows that there was a foul; but in those cases, why would we need to check to see if we got it right?

The other thing that I thought was a little off the mark was the comment that "anticipation" is helpful in high school, but not in college. His thinking seems to be that because the players are more skilled and athletic, they can do things that aren't seen in most high school games; so you can't (or shouldn't) anticipate what might happen. But this seems to show a misunderstanding of what we're anticipating. We're not anticipating that we're going to call a foul on the defender and then -- OOPS! -- he actually got to the spot first and it should've been a charge. We're anticipating that we're about to have a one-on-one drive with a possible crash, so we locate the defender. Anticipate the PLAY, not the CALL. I think that's just as valid at the college level as in high school.

Anybody think I'm way off-base?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This was one of the things that raised my eyebrows. This sounds, frankly, like a coach's perspective, not an official's perspective. I think that in the vast majority of cases, the players have no idea if you got the play right. Players and coaches almost always look astonished that you could have possibly called a foul on that play. There are, of course, obvious plays where everybody in the gym knows that there was a foul; but in those cases, why would we need to check to see if we got it right?

I think I understand what he's saying, and I agree with it. Have you ever had a ball go OOB in front of you, and you're not initially sure whose ball it should be, and before you ask for help you see all the players start walking to other end of the floor? They know whose ball it is. And there really is a subtle difference in player reactions when they really are astonished/confused at the call, as opposed to the "I've gotta look amazed so coach doesn't chew my a$$ for that stupid foul". You've probably also seen that look when you blow the whistle for the foul when there are two defenders there - one of them will give you the truly amazed look, then relax after you tell them the call was actually against their teammate.

It's not a 100% accurate barometer, and it doesn't happen every game, but there really are instances where a player can indicate whether or not you got the call right or wrong.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Have you ever had a ball go OOB in front of you, and you're not initially sure whose ball it should be, and before you ask for help you see all the players start walking to other end of the floor? They know whose ball it is...

It's not a 100% accurate barometer, and it doesn't happen every game, but there really are instances where a player can indicate whether or not you got the call right or wrong.

Concur, that's what I interpreted that statement to mean as well.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I think I understand what he's saying, and I agree with it. Have you ever had a ball go OOB in front of you, and you're not initially sure whose ball it should be, and before you ask for help you see all the players start walking to other end of the floor?

Yes, but I've also seen players that automatically point in their own direction on
every out of bounds call, and then say good call when I point the other way.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Yes, but I've also seen players that automatically point in their own direction on
every out of bounds call, and then say good call when I point the other way.

Of course, they are the same players that think they never foul either, but you learn to tell the difference. On the OOB call, I've made what I thought was the right call while the players are walking the other way, and I'm grateful when I see my partner coming up to tell me I missed a tip. It's kind of hard to ignore when all the players disagree with my initial assessment, not just a single player.

If you work this game long enough, you can see subtle differences in reactions and behavior between players that "want" a call, and players that truly know when you've missed one. I'm going to go out on a limb and say you can sometimes even tell from a crowd reaction that a call was missed. Of course, I don't normally listen to crowds and players, but sometimes there is a different tone and reaction than the normal displeasure. Like I said, it doesn't happen every game, but after a while you can tell a difference.

[bob jenkins]

1) The tape was more than 60-seconds. They should call it "3:30 on officiating"

2) I don't think John was saying "use the players to help you make the call" as much as he was saying "use the players to help you evaluate your officiating and what you need to work on."

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

1) The tape was more than 60-seconds. They should call it "3:30 on officiating"

I wonder if John was using his 10-second backcourt count to count out the length of the tape?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2) I don't think John was saying "use the players to help you make the call" as much as he was saying "use the players to help you evaluate your officiating and what you need to work on."

Agreed.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2) he was saying "use the players to help you evaluate your officiating and what you need to work on."

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

Coaches as well. I usually figure I'm doing a good job if both coaches are pissed off at me.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

True, I wouldn't use a player's reaction as the lead item in the teaching syllabus. But it is useful information, in that I can look back over that play and evaluate why I probably missed that call. Maybe I was lazy in a rotation; maybe I guessed at contact instead of actually seeing the contact; maybe I was looking somewhere I should not have been looking?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

If that's what he was saying, then I couldn't disagree more. Players know jack about the rules and officiating. I would NEVER consider a player's reaction to be useful in evaluating what I need to work on.

Never say never and never say always.

How about the reaction of the offended player? Ever call a foul and then notice that the offended player is surprised to be going to the free throw line? or he chuckles and pats the defender on the butt b/c he knows he just got a freebie?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I think I understand what he's saying, and I agree with it. Have you ever had a ball go OOB in front of you, and you're not initially sure whose ball it should be, and before you ask for help you see all the players start walking to other end of the floor? They know whose ball it is. And there really is a subtle difference in player reactions when they really are astonished/confused at the call, as opposed to the "I've gotta look amazed so coach doesn't chew my a$$ for that stupid foul". You've probably also seen that look when you blow the whistle for the foul when there are two defenders there - one of them will give you the truly amazed look, then relax after you tell them the call was actually against their teammate.

It's not a 100% accurate barometer, and it doesn't happen every game, but there really are instances where a player can indicate whether or not you got the call right or wrong.

I completely agree with your assessment on this.

Peace

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I think I understand what he's saying, and I agree with it. Have you ever had a ball go OOB in front of you, and you're not initially sure whose ball it should be, and before you ask for help you see all the players start walking to other end of the floor? They know whose ball it is.

That's not what I got out of it, obviously; but if that's all he meant, I can live with that.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

The other thing that I thought was a little off the mark was the comment that "anticipation" is helpful in high school, but not in college. His thinking seems to be that because the players are more skilled and athletic, they can do things that aren't seen in most high school games; so you can't (or shouldn't) anticipate what might happen. But this seems to show a misunderstanding of what we're anticipating. We're not anticipating that we're going to call a foul on the defender and then -- OOPS! -- he actually got to the spot first and it should've been a charge. We're anticipating that we're about to have a one-on-one drive with a possible crash, so we locate the defender. Anticipate the PLAY, not the CALL. I think that's just as valid at the college level as in high school.

Anybody think I'm way off-base?

I think what he is saying is that a play we anticipate in high school is not the same play we can anticipate in a college game. In HS that play may only have 1 or 2 possible outcomes that we look for but in college the athletism of the players allows for 4 or 5 possible outcomes. That's my interpretation of his statement.