players with 4 fouls
 

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?

Get Ready 'Cause Here It Comes ...
 

You have just reopened Pandora's Box. Be prepared. Be very prepared.

A foul is a foul is a foul in minute one and minute 32. You and your crew must be consistent with your calls.

I personally check with the table for total foul counts 7/10 to be aware of the bonus at TO's/, etc. If the table volunteers who has foul troubles that's ok. But, generally, I know who is piling up the fouls.

Are you saying your ok giving "cheap fouls" up until a player has four and then you're gonna make sure five is a good one? :confused:

Is a "cheep foul" when a bird lands on a player, or what? Sorry, couldn't help myself. If you adjust your calling based on the number of fouls a player has, you are doing the game a big disservice.

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.

Equal Opportunity Foul Caller ...
 

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.

Beachbum, I do want to know when a player has 4 fouls...not to change anything that I am calling, but so I/we are not surprised when the table tells us someone just fouled out. To me, it's the same as knowing when the 6th team foul is called, so we aren't surprised that we are shooting the bonus on the next foul. Some people think that wanting that information has no possible use other than changing the way you are calling - they are wrong. But that has been argued on here before.

I will be the black sheep.

I think you need to be aware about who has 4 fouls. If you fouled out the only kid that can dribble the ball for that team, trouble is soon behind. It better be one heck of a foul. Game management skills still have to carry some weight in the game.
I am not saying you ignore obvious advantage gains, but preventive officiating can make the game smother.

Just had a game yesterday where 4 players fouled out. With them gone, the game cleaned up a little bit.

Gotta tell ya' - this is so wrong I hardly know where to start. First of all, we don't "foul anyone out". The players commit the fouls, we only point them out when they happen. If "the only player who can dribble the ball for a team" fouls out, why is that the official's concern? If he was so valuable to that team, he shouldn't have committed so many fouls. The responsibility is his, not ours. And saying it "better be one heck of a foul" is ridiculous. It "better meet" exactly the same standard you've used for every other foul you've called that game - no more and no less. This is not preventative officiating - it's poor officiating.

Don't mean to sound vindictive, but we've gone over having this attitude numerous times here.

Game awareness does matter.

When I can look at a book (upside down) I can tell who has three fouls/four fouls.... Does it make a difference in the way I call a game not really but if I know a player has 4, I am more ready when the player gets the 5th.... especially if I know shirts will come out or other dumb things to prevent a T. or other issues on the floor....

One thing that could be said is have a patient whistle, see the end of every play before making a decision to put air on something. This will hopefully lead to calling obvious fouls and decrease the likelihood of the cheap foul. Part of my pregame is precisely: call the fouls that are obvious, dont guess, stay in our primarys (unless it is a non basketball play).

This usually assures that a player earns their fouls.

And by the way, a foul early is not always a foul late, as the game changes so does the call selection. I know that there are plenty here that will disagree, but it is a fact and for anyone here to say that they call it the same every play is .... I will withold my comment

Wrong.

If a foul takes place and you have been calling that foul all game long, then call the foul regardless of when it took place or who committed the foul. If you know a player has 4 fouls, all I would suggest is make the foul be there and do not call a foul that is totally suspect. I know I have called fouls early in games that I regret or did not like and I try not to make that same mistake later in the game. The 5th foul whether you like it or not is going to be a more scrutinized call than the first 4 fouls. And when it is a star, it is even more scrutinized. Call what you see and you can hardly ever be wrong. But to be completely unaware of a situation is not as smart too in my opinion.

Peace

Not wrong :D

I don't mind that we disagree, this is a hot topic around here.

I should have rephrased the last couple of words, sorry if I offended anyone.

Well said, basically my take on things. There are many layers to this topic.

I heard from a well respected source (NBA, D league & NCAA) that game awareness can make the difference between good officials & exceptional officials. In addition to mentally knowing the team foul count, knowledge of individual fouls aren't bad either as it ties to "knowing the impact of your call". As we will never manipulate the GAME, best officials know the result & consequence of their calls.

NOTE: Every DI official that I have access to, shares the same thoughts & have turned an avocation into a very successful career.


Quality calls on 4s & 5s:

Teams & players practice & train hard to be competitive in the modern game. Post players & strong forwards are involved in more play in crowded competitive areas near the basket. These players are called to defend against players who have eluded other defensive coverage, rebound all missed shots, defend their own area or man, and score when near the basket.With all the possible contact & coverage, it is imperative that officials sort the play & call the fouls that matter. "Cheap" fouls on 4s & 5s can cause a significant competitive disadvantage to a team, and while unintended, unfairly influence play. Make solid verifiable calls on 4s & 5s.

Take it or leave it... just thought I'd share.

Here It Comes!
 

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, :D

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.

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.

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.

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

Could you explain a bit more what you mean here?

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.

Sorry, but that's pretty bad reasoning to determine if I'm calling the foul or not...If he's the only dribbler, well...the coach better get to work in practice!

That is your opinion sir. You know what I was talking about. I was just stating how to use good game management skills. There is nothing poor about it. If you have a girls middle school game and their only dribbler is fouled out for some nit picking calls, your game will go to hell. '
You can say what you want, but a game is not much a game without some kind of rhythm or flow. So if you can use some preventive officiating by talking to players, the game flows smoother.
The same principle goes for the game "knucklehead." Every game has one and as soon as you can get rid of him/her, the game cleans up.

I am so sorry that your having to explain yourself again on this opinion, but I just have recently joined. I am enjoying the good conversations.

Merry Christmas

Clarification
 

So just to clarify:

You will cut a player some slack if they have talent just so "your" game doesn't get messed up?

And conversely, your post suggests that getting rid of the "knucklehead" makes the game better. Do you go out of your way to "see" fouls committed by the alleged "knucklehead"?

Your reply was not directed at me but I will follow up my first response with this. The bolded part is of no concern to me...if it goes to hell, it goes to hell....I have my own team that I coach when not officiating and my job as official is not to adjust calls for the better players so the game doesn't go to hell.

We seem to have two discussions going. One is nit picky fouls and the other is who you are calling them on.

There is no provision in the rulebook that protects the best dribbler (or any other best skill set player you want to put out here) on a team. Why would that even come into consideration by an official to call or not to call a violation is simply silly and shows you have a biasedness toward one team or player. Cardinal sin as an official.

If you foul the player out it more than likely has something to do with contact that He or She is creating, causing you to blow the whistle.

Weather or not it's nit picky is soley up to the officials on the court who are charged with putting air in the whistle.

How did I miss reading this one? This is exactly my point.

I find this post more disturbing than the first one. Depending on your definition of the term, I think most of us try to avoid this. But when an official uses this phrase, in any context, I see it as a problem.

Break out the popcorn!

I am always ok with a good discussion that does not include personal insults. Besides, if we all agreed, there would be no need for this board. :D

Prevent a T.... If you know he/she is frustrated you may be able to pay attention and get to them early before they have time to do something stupid that we need to deal with...

Kelvin:

Knowing whether a player does or does not have four fouls has nothing to do with the scenario you just painted. The official should always be aware of possible problems with a player's attitude, THAT is game awareness, not knowing whether or not he has four fouls.

MTD, Sr.

So when you did not know player "X" has 4 fouls, I am not sure how you would know to be "preventative" in an outburst?

Peace

This whole line of thinking is thin, at best, IMO. Some players foul out every night and smile the whole time. Others are an outburst waiting to happen when they foul, when they get fouled, or any other time.

Like I said, we've had this discussion on here before. Some people want to know as much info as possible - NOT to change the way they are calling the game, but to be aware of what is going on. I will never ask the scorekeeper who has 4 fouls or who is in foul trouble, but if they are putting the fouls on the board or have a PA person announcing the fouls - I WILL know when a player commits their 4th. Others seem to have some misguided notion that this desire for information means I am somehow cheating or trying to manipulate the game. My response to those people - whatever. They don't get it. I don't care that they don't get it. C'est la vie.

When there are 2 books at the table I will ask them to verify that they have the same players in foul trouble (3 or 4 fouls); if there is a discrepency we can take care of it then and there so we don't have any disputes when someone fouls out.

That's really good, hope you don't mind but after X-Mas break, that's going into my game.

game awareness
 

You will see more often than not at the upper levels that when there are two players available to take the foul and the impact player is in foul trouble the non impact player comes away with the foul, just watch the games and comment later.

We really need to know which team has 5 which has 6 for management of the game, and awareness allows us to know if the impact player on team A has 3 and the impact player on team B has 4 fouls. If the player commits the foul you make the call, if either the impact player or another player could get the foul you tend to give it to the non impact player, it is what I have been told to do, by those mentoring me from the D1 and above levels.

as far as knuckleheads go, they get no slack, if it is a foul, it is a foul, but they get the foul. the quicker a knuckle head legitimately gets to three or five the faster you do not have to deal with them.

No one is saying not to make, or to make up, foul calls, they are saying to make the calls consistantly yet where you can use some descretion to contribute to the competativeness and quaility of the game.

I completely agree.

Peace

Couple of thoughts. I want to know if a player has 4, and usually I never have to ask because I'll know. The talk about star players getting protected is bogus and a weak argument. First, the only time fouling out is an issue with the players, coahces, and schools is when the game is close down the stretch and a player is important to his team. That said, when this occurs, knowing ther player has 4 gives you the option of trying to prevent him from getting his 5th. "Hey, you got 4, be smart" has helped me a lot, but unless the player likes and trusts you, this tool is unavailable. The other one is "high certainty". I know everyone here is so good that they are always on super focus mode, always 100% certain of all their calls, and never guess because they are always in the best position at all times. I'll never protect any player--star or not--but I will remind myself and work very hard mentally in a close game down rthe stretch to have "high certainty" on every whistle. That maximizes your chances of being successful anyway, but also helps you with how the crew is perceived when a player does foul out.

The trouble always starts when "high certainty" is not obvious on these types of calls. Both sides are right. A foul in minute 1 is a foul in minute 40, but you do control your focus and can apply "high certainty" every single time in the last 2-3 minutes of a close game. None of us can do that for 40 minutes every time we work. That's why we're human.

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. :rolleyes:

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.

Since when is it your job to coach the players? If I'm the opposing coach, it would sure sound like favoritism to me.

Of course it's favoritism. We favor players over coaches. ;)

The only time I tell a player to be smart is when he looks like he's getting frustrated and might get a T.

being aware that a player has four fouls and telling everyone in the building you are aware that that player has four fouls are two different things.

I would never tell a player to watch it you have four fouls, I would tell a player to be smart, or take a deep breath, or watch it - now is not the time to be get a case of the stupids, to avoid the player doing something that has consequences.

But the discussion of how many fouls a player has is just asking for trouble - especially when s/he turns and say's "Go ahead a## @*$% give me my fifth!" :eek:

What can I say? You can't fix stupid.

I'll go along with you on this. If the information is readily available, I don't advocate making a point NOT to know. I simply say that being conspicuous about gathering this information can be easily misconstrued by others. When the phrases "make sure the 5th is not a cheap one" and "involving the star player" are included in the discussion, I feel we have crossed the line.

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.

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

That's coaching a player? Besides, how would you even know what I said to a player? You wouldn't. Too funny. Good thing my people skills defuse paranoia.

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.

Players talk.

Coach: "Hey, Bobby, what'd the ref say to you?"
Bobby: "He said I have four fouls and to play smart."

And that's just Bobby's coach that's going to be upset with you.

Yeah, that's coaching the kids. If that's okay where you ref, so be it; but it wouldn't be okay any place I've reffed.
Coach: "Hey, Billy, what'd the ref say to #24 red?"
Billy: "He said he had 4 fouls and to play smart."

Coach: "That's three seconds!"
Official: "Coach, I can't have you officiating from the bench like that."
Coach: "Why not, you've been coaching from the court."

And I agree with that. Notice you haven't read those comments in any of my posts!!:)

With ANYONE having 4 fouls, it's not the official's job to change the way he's officiating; it's the player's job to change the way he's playing.

Just My Opinion ...
 

I've heard this from some very, highly regarded, and highly respected, officials on my local board. That's fine for them, but not for me. I never called a multiple foul, nor have I ever seen one called, or heard about one called, so the foul that puts the fouled player at the greatest disadvantage is the one that I'm calling, whether it's a star player's second foul, a star player's fifth foul, or a bench warmer's foul.

You can make that case. I've not had any problems with what I do. If anything, the coaches I deal with appreciate preventative officiating, and the players know I'm trying to help them. I guess it is all how you are perceived by the coaches and players. If your judgment or people skills are off, you are correct, you can get bit. I still think that this is the right approach. If you can learn to do it, game management and relationships with the players and coaches becomes very simple.

BTW, I'd never respond to a coach yelling 3 seconds. :D

Not the first time, anyway; but you just gonna ignore him if he's yelling it every time down the court?

You did not just say that!

After all of the wrangling back and forth over whether it is right or wrong to know if a player has three or four fouls - and it influencing your calls you just said that you were going to call the foul that puts the player (thereby the team) at the greatest disadvantage.

You sure you do not want to rephrase that - becuase if you disagree with the original premise IMO what you just wrote is worse.

You misunderstood Billy's point. He is going to call a foul on whichever player caused the greatest disadvantage to the shooter, regardless of whether it is the fouling player's second foul or fifth foul.

then I recind my interpretation, my only disagreement then is
I do try to do as my mentors tell me in order to advance to the levels that they work. it does seem to follow when I see my comments in reviews about game managment.

Hate to say it, but this just doesn't happen in my games very often. However, if I worked at a level where an immature coach started with that, I cannot imagine that the quick "OK, I'll call it if they get an advantage", said nicely, would not stop it.

In all honesty, I don't see this anymore either. One a year in a JV game, though, I'll have a coach do something similar to the other thread where the T was called 37 seconds in. Every trip it's something, "Moving screen, over the back, travel, carry, double dribble, three seconds," etc. It's not yelling, but it needs to be addressed. Sometimes the quick comment made "nicely" works, and once in a while it doesn't.