Camp notes

[zebraman]

I know, personally, a couple of final four officials and they have told me stories about how they have screwed up rules because they haven't known them. These stories involve situations in the NCAA tournament. These officials have great presence and credibility, but some of them have terrible mechanics and I would think that rules knowledge is somewhat suspect, due to the stories they tell about themselves. Does that make them "poor" officials? I don't think so.

Stripes, let me ask you this. Is there any correlation between their rule knowledge and their screw-ups? Would you want to ref a final four game with them on National TV knowing their rule knowledge was suspect? Not me.

Z

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by zebraman
I know, personally, a couple of final four officials and they have told me stories about how they have screwed up rules because they haven't known them. These stories involve situations in the NCAA tournament. These officials have great presence and credibility, but some of them have terrible mechanics and I would think that rules knowledge is somewhat suspect, due to the stories they tell about themselves. Does that make them "poor" officials? I don't think so.

Stripes, let me ask you this. Is there any correlation between their rule knowledge and their screw-ups? Would you want to ref a final four game with them on National TV knowing their rule knowledge was suspect? Not me.

Z

Wha? Come on now, you would pass up the chance to work a
D1 final 4 with a veteran because their rules knowledge
was not quite up to snuff? When you turn the game down
please give them my number.

[zebraman]

Well I'd love to ref a final four, but I'd hope that if I got there it was because I had the complete package. I would expect the same of my partners. Would you like to be known as part of the officiating team that decided a game because of not doing enough rule study?

Z

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by zebraman
Well I'd love to ref a final four, but I'd hope that if I got there it was because I had the complete package. I would expect the same of my partners. Would you like to be known as part of the officiating team that decided a game because of not doing enough rule study?

Z

The guys/gals who get there have the complete package.
If I get there I will have the complete package (there will
also be a hard frost in hell but that's a different
thread ). Officials screw up, it happens, life goes on.
BTW, there was recently (last 2 or 3 yrs) a HUGE mess up in
the last few seconds of a tight D1 tourney game. Can you
name the refs? The game? The sitch?

[JAdams]

Echoing a post above, try to not pay for camp services until they're delivered. When I was in my third year of officiating I attended a local high school camp which promised individual videotaping. I paid the full amount of the camp upfront, and the camp coordinators finked on the taping... most disappointing.

[zebraman]

Can you name the refs? The game? The sitch?

No, but I bet the coaches involved and all the referees in that conference (including the evaluator/assignor) can. And I bet it reflected on all three refs in the crew.

Actually, I got sidetracked from my original point which was to just have a little fun with Rut since he has been known to rail on the "presence" side of "presence vs. rule knowledge" a few times.

None of us can recite the rule book verbatim and none of us are above getting caught on a once-in-a-lifetime situation where we weren't sure of what rule applied. Anyone who gets to a final four is obviously a great ref. However, it has been my experience that some veteran refs quit doing a yearly rule study once they have reached a certain level. Then they get caught with their pants down. When given the choice between a partner with great rule knowledge or great presence, I would feel much more comfortable being teamed up with the partner who has great rule knowledge. Just my personal preference.

Z

[Tim Roden]

Rules is important but not the most important. if anything is weighted it is the game managment aspect of it. Presence is next. Presence is the first impression that a coach or assignor will have of you. Do you belong on the floor. But in my case, I never trust first impressions so game managment is more important because you can have all the presence in the world and you can't manage a game then you are in big trouble. With rules knowledge, you have one to two other officials to consult if you don't know a rule. If you know scott, not scott K, from the other board who shows up every now and then. He has the book memorized and he carries great presence on the floor. But coaches don't want to see him because of his game management skills. I have also watched George Demetreau, a published writter, work a game. Good knowledge and game management but poor presence on the floor. Me, I have to work on both presence and game management. I think I have the management down better then the presence after looking at my last video.

[bigwhistle]

[QUOTE

BTW, there was recently (last 2 or 3 yrs) a HUGE mess up in
the last few seconds of a tight D1 tourney game. Can you
name the refs? The game? The sitch? [/B][/QUOTE]

Robert Strong, Lollie Sienz, and a veteran male from the east coast. Women's regional final between UCLA and someone. They allowed the thrower-in to run the baseline on a spot throw-in at the end of the game, and then the clock did not start on time, which allowed the winning basket to be scored when it should not have.

This play was the catalyst for the women's game to modify the end of game procedures as to when the officials leave the floor after a close game (less than 4 point difference).

The bad thing is, the officials thought they had nailed the game until the observor came in after the game.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by bigwhistle
[QUOTE

BTW, there was recently (last 2 or 3 yrs) a HUGE mess up in
the last few seconds of a tight D1 tourney game. Can you
name the refs? The game? The sitch?

Robert Strong, Lollie Sienz, and a veteran male from the east coast. Women's regional final between UCLA and someone. They allowed the thrower-in to run the baseline on a spot throw-in at the end of the game, and then the clock did not start on time, which allowed the winning basket to be scored when it should not have.

This play was the catalyst for the women's game to modify the end of game procedures as to when the officials leave the floor after a close game (less than 4 point difference).

The bad thing is, the officials thought they had nailed the game until the observor came in after the game. [/B][/QUOTE]

You got it! I believe the other team was Tennessee (not
sure) but I do know UCLA was playing on the other team's
home court, and of course UCLA ended up losing.

[ChuckElias]

I remember a game, I think it was in the SEC, in which a player was fouled in the act of shooting. After getting fouled, he was assessed a T (probably for getting in the defender's face) which was his 5th foul of the game. The officials allowed him to shoot the 2 FTs for the personal foul. He was then DQ'd, then the other team shot the FTs for the technical. Ouch. This was probably 4 years ago now.

Chuck

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman
Can you name the refs? The game? The sitch?

No, but I bet the coaches involved and all the referees in that conference (including the evaluator/assignor) can. And I bet it reflected on all three refs in the crew.

Actually, I got sidetracked from my original point which was to just have a little fun with Rut since he has been known to rail on the "presence" side of "presence vs. rule knowledge" a few times.

None of us can recite the rule book verbatim and none of us are above getting caught on a once-in-a-lifetime situation where we weren't sure of what rule applied. Anyone who gets to a final four is obviously a great ref. However, it has been my experience that some veteran refs quit doing a yearly rule study once they have reached a certain level. Then they get caught with their pants down. When given the choice between a partner with great rule knowledge or great presence, I would feel much more comfortable being teamed up with the partner who has great rule knowledge. Just my personal preference.

Z

This is what is so frustrating about talking to some here or any board for that matter. The Presence vs. rule knowledge discussion was about what I perfered in an official. What "I" wanted if I had to choose for a partner. Most of the time I do not have any choice in who I get to work with. But I when I can choose my partner and when I can choose who I work with, I do not want a guy that can just quote rules. If that is all you have to offer, then I will pass. I want an individual that can actually handle themselves under pressure and deal with coaches and players in an appropriate manner. I do not want someone that can quote the rules, but T the entire bench because they gave him or her some crap. I want someone that would know how to deal with the situation without anybody really knowing about it, but me and another partner.

Rules are the foundation on which we all have to build on. I for one know the rules, but applying them is another story all together as far as I am concerned. Things I used to call in my first few years of officiating, I do not even call anymore because I know how to prevent these things from happening now that I have been around the block.

And finally if rules were at the most importance as you think Z, tell me why I have never seen an D1 official in any of the sports I do (Football, Basketball or Baseball) lost or gained assignments based on a test score. College rules are always very different from HS rules. Why would you not have to take a simple qualification test like you do for HS? And BTW, show me any place that requires it other than HS? That also includes Junior High or AAU (rec. league type ball). Why are these officials that do all these other levels not required to have a 80 out of 100 like the NF levels usually have to?

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Tim Roden
Rules is important but not the most important. if anything is weighted it is the game managment aspect of it. Presence is next. Presence is the first impression that a coach or assignor will have of you. Do you belong on the floor. But in my case, I never trust first impressions so game managment is more important because you can have all the presence in the world and you can't manage a game then you are in big trouble. With rules knowledge, you have one to two other officials to consult if you don't know a rule. If you know scott, not scott K, from the other board who shows up every now and then. He has the book memorized and he carries great presence on the floor. But coaches don't want to see him because of his game management skills. I have also watched George Demetreau, a published writter, work a game. Good knowledge and game management but poor presence on the floor. Me, I have to work on both presence and game management. I think I have the management down better then the presence after looking at my last video.

that your presence is how you manage the game? I do understand that they are slightly different, but if you are the calm with the storm falling all around you, would you not be "managing" the game by your demeanor or the tone in which you handle the conflict?

Peace

[Tim Roden]

Presence is how you look when you come out onto the floor. How you look. Do you look like you belong. Many game management problems come from not having a good presence. That is why lifting weights and watching videos of yourself call games is important. You need to look like you know what you are doing.

Game managment is being able to do the right thing at the right time. Talk to the right player talk to the right coach or both coaches. Say the right things. Do the right things to make the game run smooth. Call the appropriate foul at the appropriate time and not let the game get out of hand. You can have an ugly presence but manage the game well. You can also have a good presence but the game gets out of hand because you are not practicing game managment.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Tim Roden
Presence is how you look when you come out onto the floor. How you look. Do you look like you belong. Many game management problems come from not having a good presence. That is why lifting weights and watching videos of yourself call games is important. You need to look like you know what you are doing.

Game managment is being able to do the right thing at the right time. Talk to the right player talk to the right coach or both coaches. Say the right things. Do the right things to make the game run smooth. Call the appropriate foul at the appropriate time and not let the game get out of hand. You can have an ugly presence but manage the game well. You can also have a good presence but the game gets out of hand because you are not practicing game managment.

I just wanted to see if you were thinking about it the way I was. Not to think that you were not, but I have been ripped apart for even suggesting what you just stated. I wanted to see if I was the only one that was taught that way.

Peace

[Tim Roden]

I think we were all taught the same way. We just don't interpret it the same way or regurgitate it correctly.