Great experience

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
Juulie, I appreciate you being so positive, and your excitement for my situation. But as is clear just from this thread, I still have plenty to improve. I just want to be clear that I'm not making these posts to be a big shot, or to differentiate myself from the "little people". I'm just sharing my excitement. I'm just like everybody else here; trying to learn, trying to move up, trying to be as good as I can be in whatever game I happen to be working at the time.Chuck

I was thinking about this thread today in the car, and about my camp experience this weekend, and I realized that what you posted here is the classic "First Real Game at Next Level Up." The nerves, the uncertainties, the good feelings about right calls, the mental fatigue 2/3 of the way through, the de-briefing and notes afterward. It's all there. By posting this, you are not elevating yourself, but putting yourself right smack dab in the middle of the human race, just a little further down the road from some of us. It will be good for us if you keep posting, so that we can all see how human we all are.

[mick]

Thanks for sharing that, Chuck.
Really enjoyed it.
mick

[BktBallRef]

Help me understand how the T can have a better look at a secondary defender? Isn't the T refereeing B1? Wouldn't the L have a better look at whether B2 has legal position than the T, since B2 is probaby coming from the weak side?

It just seems to me that the T is not going to have as good of a look as the L regarding B2's legal or illegal postion. Perhaps I'm visualizing it incorrectly.

[ChuckElias]

Hey!! I'm back! Did you miss me? What? Yes, I was gone. For a whole week! I was. . . Never mind. Sorry to drudge up this old thread, but I wanted to add the following to the discussion of my blarge call. I emailed the scenario, just as I described it to you folks, to an official I respect very much. He works the USBL and NBDL. But since I didn't ask his permission to drop his name, I'll withhold it. I told him about the play and my suspicion that we didn't administrate it correctly. Here is his response, without any edits:

good to hear from you. technically you are correct and should have assessed a double foul (diff. of opinion by officials) if you both signalled. remember there is a casebook play on this exact play. no team fouls, jump center circle, any two in game.

now, on these plays that start from trail you need to be aware of what is going on. even if the ball is above free throw line extended and not in your primary if there is an isolation then expect that play to come your way. in my pregames i will communicate this to my partners, that iso's a little above free throw line ext. as lead i would like to pick up so i can see the whole play. the trail would then go off ball once he sees you have picked up on the ball action.

as for the restricted area. DON"T SPLIT HAIRS on these type of plays. go with the obvious call! the defender gets hit in the chest and he is outside the RA. i would go offense. however, if you clearly have him moving forward and "submarining" the dribbler signal block. if your partner comes in and says he's 100% sure the defender was out(and he hasn't signalled) just explain to him/her that you had the defender moving forward. officials are able to confer when it comes to the RA in order to get the correct call.

In my example, the defender did not "submarine" the shooter, so it seems that this official would have had an offensive foul.

Chuck