players with 4 fouls

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by beachbum

I guess the word cheep is not right. I mean a questionable foul. but I think i get your drift..just call what you see and if someone fouls out, they foul out.

I agree that you don't want to "foul someone out" on a "cheap / questionable call."

Since all fouls count the same, avoid the cheap questionable call early in the game and you won't have a problem.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by beachbum

It doesn't seem appropriate to go to the scorekeeper and ask, "who has 4 fouls" at say the start of the 4th quarter. that might appear to everyone that you could be showing favoritism to those players.

At least you're not asking about four fouls on only the star players, so you're treating every player the same. Wanting to know which of the star players had four fouls would make it a different story completely.

I know. I'm a bad boy. Just looking forward to some excitement after I come in from shoveling snow. See you guys (the generic guys, meaning guys, and gals) in an hour, or so. I can't wait to see what beachbum, and I, started. Too bad Jurassic Referee is on sabbatical.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by beachbum

Many gyms do not post the players number and number of fouls on the score board as they occur. As a newer guy, i don't want to foul someone out on a cheep foul, but it is hard to know the foul situation for each team.
It doesn't seem appropriate to go to the scorekeeper and ask, "who has 4 fouls" at say the start of the 4th quarter. that might appear to everyone that you could be showing favoritism to those players.

How do you experienced guys get the information you want in that senario?

BeachBum:

Not only is it inapporpriate it is absolutely WRONG to ever ask which players have four (4) fouls. Officials do NOT care who has four fouls PERIOD!!

MTD, Sr.


P.S.: BillyMac, this post was for your first post of the thread,

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

BeachBum:

Not only is it inapporpriate it is absolutely WRONG to ever ask which players have four (4) fouls. Officials do NOT care who has four fouls PERIOD!!

MTD, Sr.


P.S.: BillyMac, this post was for your first post of the thread,

I disagree entirely...this is the attitude I was talking about in my earlier post. There are officials who want to know who has 4 fouls - and for very legitimate reasons. The knee-jerk reaction of some people to automatically think it is wrong to want to know as much information as possible is disturbing at best, and ridiculous at worst.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

I disagree entirely...this is the attitude I was talking about in my earlier post. There are officials who want to know who has 4 fouls - and for very legitimate reasons. The knee-jerk reaction of some people to automatically think it is wrong to want to know as much information as possible is disturbing at best, and ridiculous at worst.

RockyRoad:

Knowing the team foul totals is a legitimate piece of information that I want to know but I do not need to now who has four fouls and neither does anyother official. When does a player tend to commit his fifth foul? The fourth quarter. So unless I have a player who has been a real hacker, I am going to be cognizant of the fact that when I report a foul that it could be the player's fifth foul. I just do not report the foul and immediately turn away from the table. I take the same attitude late in the second and fourth quarters if we have not yet reached the bonus situation. This is called dead ball management: don't rush but take care of business.

MTD, Sr.

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

RockyRoad:

This is called dead ball management: don't rush but take care of business.

MTD, Sr.

Deadball management...I'd rather have game awareness and know prior to the player committing their 5th foul that they have just picked up #4. It is just like knowing that a team has picked up their 6th team foul and the next one will result in Bonus FT's.

By your logic you don't want to know that until it happens. Rocky is talking about being proactive rather than reactive

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Deadball management...I'd rather have game awareness and know prior to the player committing their 5th foul that they have just picked up #4. It is just like knowing that a team has picked up their 6th team foul and the next one will result in Bonus FT's.

By your logic you don't want to know that until it happens. Rocky is talking about being proactive rather than reactive

icallfouls:

I do want to know when a team has six team fouls, but as officials we really do not need to know who has four fouls. It is not germane to game awareness or game management, but can lead to game manipulation.

Knowing how many team fouls each team has is good game management and is good game awareness because it helps prevent correctable errors from happening. But that last thing an official needs is people quesitioning why he wants to know who has four fouls and hell, while he is at it who has three fouls for that matter, just think Tim Donaghy.

And dead ball management is very important. When the ball is live it means we are playing basketball, when the ball is dead the game is not being played and 99.99% of the time nothing good ever happens during a dead ball time period and that is why dead ball management is very important to game management AND game awareness is an important part of dead ball management.

With regard to dead ball management, I would like to recommend trying to find a video of Fred Horgan (past President of IAABO and currently representing Canada on the FIBA Technical Board; Padgett, no FEEBLE joke this time) giving his presentation on dead ball management. It is must see for all basketball officials whether one officiates, NFHS, NCAA, NBA/WNBA, or FIBA. Hopefully one of our Canadian members can point us in the direction of a video of one of his presentations on the web.

MTD, Sr.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

RockyRoad:

Knowing the team foul totals is a legitimate piece of information that I want to know but I do not need to now who has four fouls and neither does anyother official. When does a player tend to commit his fifth foul? The fourth quarter. So unless I have a player who has been a real hacker, I am going to be cognizant of the fact that when I report a foul that it could be the player's fifth foul. I just do not report the foul and immediately turn away from the table. I take the same attitude late in the second and fourth quarters if we have not yet reached the bonus situation. This is called dead ball management: don't rush but take care of business.

MTD, Sr.

Thank you for being so concerned with saving me from myself. While we're at it, are there any other pieces of highly flammable information that I ought not to know? You know, for the greater good.

Really? If you haven't reached the bonus, you'll still hang out at the table waiting for them to tell you ... what, that you haven't reached the bonus? Or are you saying that you don't know whether or not you've reached the bonus, and therefore wait at the table for them to tell you? If so, I wish you well finding your shooter. Or do you expect your partner to get your shooter for you? Assuming he's not so dependent on dead ball management to get his information on a need to know basis.

[beachbum]

I would bet that most officials can reflect back at calls made in their games and think that there were some that, if the given the chance to go back, would not make that same call.

that is what I would call a cheep or questionable call.

So, when talking about a players 5th foul, If in reflecting back you think,"gosh i wish I would have held my whistle on that one", that is what this discussion is about.

If the guy hammers someone going up for a basket, it's a no brainer, give him his 5th. But in knowing a player has 4 and see him do something questionable, and then giving the 5th!!!

If the same ref gave all of the fouls in a game, then you would have consistency, but since we rotate, each official is going to view a play differently. If you think that statement is not true, think about the times your partner has called a foul and you wondered what he saw that you didn't.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by beachbum

I would bet that most officials can reflect back at calls made in their games and think that there were some that, if the given the chance to go back, would not make that same call.

that is what I would call a cheep or questionable call.

So, when talking about a players 5th foul, If in reflecting back you think,"gosh i wish I would have held my whistle on that one", that is what this discussion is about.

If the guy hammers someone going up for a basket, it's a no brainer, give him his 5th. But in knowing a player has 4 and see him do something questionable, and then giving the 5th!!!

You shouldn't even give the player his first on this. If it's just questionable, it's legal.

Originally Posted by beachbum

If the same ref gave all of the fouls in a game, then you would have consistency, but since we rotate, each official is going to view a play differently. If you think that statement is not true, think about the times your partner has called a foul and you wondered what he saw that you didn't.

You really should make it a point not to make foul calls unless you see what happened. If you don't see it, don't call it.

That said, everyone makes that call now and then; but I would hope you don't make them every game. I'd much rather look back and think, "I should have had a whistle there."

Personally, I think everyone should make every foul call as if it might be the player's fifth. Those that think the fifth should be an extra careful call will learn to call every foul like that, and those that make every call carefully won't have to change a thing.

[deecee]

Any type of "whatever management" that is not explicity covered in the rule books just falls under officials preferences. Each method has its followers and each side swears their way is better and the other way is not as optimal. Then we argue over how each person wants to run a game as if its our place to say.

The rule book allows for anything not covered in the rule book to be at our discretion. People feel comfortable doing it one way over another fine. Until someone who has authority over them (their association) tells them to do otherwise its just opinion. If some guys want to coach, let them, its their choice and their responsibility. Who are any of you to tell them what to do and then get so worked up when they reject your opinion.

As officials sometimes we think to much about the game an not about the job. Get on the floor make your calls, and when you are done leave. No one outside of our circle really gives a damn that we are there, and they are not there to watch us. If some guys feel comfortable officiating players rather than the game, then let them. Its their choice and their career. Its also their region and their territory.

I do think that there are differences between officials that are greater than just personal preference. I think region, and association play as a big a part in how we officiate from one area to another when it comes to certain items. But what I have learned from experience is what a lot of "experienced" officals say about reffing, that sounds so good its as if they are on a pulpit, and what they actually do when they are officiating a game is like night and day. Then again I had one such "experienced" official tell me that me and my partner looked sloppy because one of us had pleated pants and the other didnt (this was during my 6th year). When he started to give some more feedback I just got up and left. I appreciated any feedback and help that is useful and will make me a better official, but sometimes I do feel like the "experienced" officials just like to hear themselves talk.