How do you like this story...?

[dave30]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I would hazard a guess that every good referee would disagree vehemently with you and your "bending the rules" philosophy. Quite simply, it's wrong. It has no place in officiating a game at any level.

Your job is to officiate. Period! Equally, fairly and equitably for BOTH teams. It is NOT your job to judge coaches and players who are playing WITHIN the rules. The problem is a league problem, not an officiating problem.

Real officials don't cheat.

I realize that you don't care. Unfortunately, you don't care about our officiating ethics either.

Sad!

It's not cheating. We are here for the kids and that includes some that can't play very well. No one deserves to be embarrassed that way. It's possible to send a message to a coach who won't back off a little bit.

It was not a high-level game. One team was not competitive and they haven't been for four years. Give them a break.

It's easy to be high and mighty and "call it by the book all the time". I guess none of you have ever given a team the benefit of a call when they are down by 40+ points with no hope of ever catching up.

I wish I was as perfect as some of you, but common sense takes priority sometimes.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by dave30

It's not cheating. We are here for the kids and that includes some that can't play very well. No one deserves to be embarrassed that way. It's possible to send a message to a coach who won't back off a little bit.

In my experience, the most abominable behavior gets "justified" in terms of being "for the kids." That doesn't wash.

I have no problem with sending a message to the coach. During a dead ball: "Coach, do you really have to keep pressing? C'mon." That's a message.

What you're doing is making up rules, and it is not legitimate. If you really want to effect legitimate change, talk to the league about changing the rule so that the press must be taken off after a X point lead (for some X). Then enforce your new rule.

[dave30]

Of course I wouldn't cheat, but I didn't state my point well enough. I talked to my buddy who is a college official and he kind of gave me some ideas.

He said that you are "within the context of the rule book" to call a foul on any contact that disrupts the rhythm or balance of a player.

Team A is completely dominant. They are able to play through minimal contact with no problem.

Team B simply cannot play. Any contact disrupts their rhythm or balance.

Therefore, unless Team A can play defense and steal the ball every single time with zero contact, then I am within the context of the rules to call a foul on any contact since Team B is unable to play through any minimal contact. All contact puts them at a severe disadvantage. So, a hand of the back, body contact on a steal, however minimal is a Foul.

Team A is able to play through minimal contact without it disrupting their rhythm or balance. In other words, they still are able to do what they want to do and go where they want to go.



Are you guys telling me that you would call the exact same foul against Team B as you would Team A when A is not affected by minimal contact and B is just completely knocked off balance? You would really have Team A shooting double bonus leading 84-0? Team B should get the benefit of calls because any contact at all disrupts anything they are trying to do.

It's called game management and "looking at the big picture". One team is not competitive and staying within the context of the rules, you are still able to call enough fouls to hopefully get the winning coach to back off a little.


Here is another example: If Team B is down 95-0 with a minute or so to play, and they throw the ball in bounds and the dribbler takes a couple of baby steps before dribbling.....and travels slightly.....would you really call travelling in that situation? Or , would you let it go?

The rulebook says.....call the travel.....common sense says to ignore it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by dave30

Are you guys telling me that you would call the exact same foul against Team B as you would Team A when A is not affected by minimal contact and B is just completely knocked off balance? You would really have Team A shooting double bonus leading 84-0? Team B should get the benefit of calls because any contact at all disrupts anything they are trying to do.

It's called game management and "looking at the big picture". One team is not competitive and staying within the context of the rules, you are still able to call enough fouls to hopefully get the winning coach to back off a little.

If I have to do that for a team that is down by 84 points and they have 0, then there is a big problem. And for all you know, there might not have been any fouls to call. If you cannot score at least on field goal, I doubt free throws are going to help.

Peace

[grunewar]

The article is a bit long, but has some interesting comments including:

Mary Struckhoff, assistant director of the National Federation of State High School Associations, says 28 states responded to a survey last March and eight reported basketball mercy rules with varying specifics.

These help to hasten the end of such games, Struckhoff says, but are no substitute for coaches acting responsibly. "You can't legislate ethics," she says.

Full article is at: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/preps...blowouts_N.htm

[just another ref]

On a related note, two nearby crosstown rivals met for the second time this season last night. The first score was 121-33 Last night's game: 77-57