How do you like this story...?
 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...t.40d72ee.html


As an official working that game I would have been a little hot under the collar....

Makes you wish NFHS would introduce a blowout rule, where the clock runs when you're up by 20+ points...cuz I'm sure that wasn't pretty.

Montana has implemented a mercy rule this year. Up by 40 in the 2nd half and the clock runs unless there is a time out, injury or Technical. It has been used a few times but I have not been part of that yet.

What's the big deal? In the fourth quarter, they outscored the other team by only 12. :rolleyes:

I'm sure if there was a broadcaster there, he would have made some typical moronic comment like, "the game was a lot closer than the score indicated".

Looking back on my playing career, I don't recall the score of a single game played, nor do I recall any win-loss records. I do recall the friendships that I've made, and maintained. Some of those friendships go back 25 years. These girls 20 years from now might remember and laugh about a 100-0 loss, but it will likely be as a side conversation discussing parenting techniques, career moves, etc. Just my 2 cents.

We have one league that has a running clock when a team is up by 30+ but only for lower-level games :(

I love that the coach says "it just happened"...100pts do not "just happen"....

If you convert to centigrade, the score is a much more pallatable 37.7 to -17.7

Here's a good news story!
 

New Jersey Institute of Technology ends 51-game skid

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/sport...11286730.shtml

Great quote:

The victory over Bryant gave first-year coach Jim Engles, a former Columbia assistant, his first win as a head coach.

"It's a huge sense of relief," said Engles, who joked that a friend told him he was "the highest-paid coach in the country per win right now."

California has a mercy rule -- 40 point lead in the 4th quarter we go to running clock except for TO's.

Like a 40 point lead anytime in the second half can be come back from in HS is absurd. The only way I would think that would happen if the team losing gets Kobe or Lebron in uniform half way through the third the comback might be possible. But even those 2 could maybe only guard 2 at best 3 players at a time :)

Now the winning team is trying to charge themselves with a forefeit and has offered an apology...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200....ap/index.html

At a girl’s basketball game, it just happened. You have to be pretty bad to not score a point.

Peace

One of my most memorable games from last year:

Girls JV. School A are visitors and have a typical JV squad in the area. School B has 5 girls to start. One kid who is an athlete and some skills, others all look like first year players. School B's basketball program is in shambles, but has new varsity coach who has come in committed to making the program better.

It hasn't 'taken' yet, though, and this is towards end of the season. Nobody in the stands... Anyways, Team B is getting beaten pretty badly from the outset. Can't handle pressure, lots of easy basket for visitors. But the girls are playing hard, especially on defense!

Halftime comes, and visitors are probably up 40-3 or somesuch. Team B's best player has racked up 4 fouls. Partner and I know this, but even then, she clobbers a Team A player and we have to call the foul. She is gone, and now home team has 4 girls, and is getting 'slaughtered'.

So what happens? These girls kinda go crazy with effort the rest of the way. They had to be tired, and had every right to be discouraged, but played HARD for the remainder of the game. Maybe 65-5 by the end.

It made a very lasting impression on me. Very impressive.

Agreed, but the winning coach didn't just all of a sudden wake up and go "holy *&*() we are winning 98-0!" There are things you can do to call off the dogs...run your offense, but drop back into a zone on defense and work on some things...but hey if they don't tell me how to officiate I won't tell them how to coach:)

Coffee spewage after reading this!

Earlier this year I had a situation where team A was murdering team B - final score broke a local scoring record and they won by like 80 pts, but pressed from the opening tip to the final horn. While personally I didn't think much of the team A coach for doing what he was doing, as an official it is/was not my responsibility to alter the way the game was being called...one of my partners on the other hand came in at halftime and was visibly upset with the strategy of team A...he basically said in so many words that every time a team A player breathed on a team B player he was calling a foul...my response at the time was "lets just call our games", but sure enough he proceeded to whistle a foul every time team A even approached a team B player, we were 9-0 on fouls at one point (please refrain from the "why does this matter" routine, it mattered b/c of the way that it happened)...made for a very uncomfortable second half...what would you all have done in this situation?

I really, really wish I could have been working that game!

Once the team was up by 30+ and they continued to press.....every single steal that they made would've been a foul ! I would have sent a message to the coach to stop pressing and if he didn't get the message, then all of his players would foul out!

Also, if they were approaching 100 points and continuing to shoot 3 pters, I guarantee on a few of those, that I would have blown the whistle and signalled, "travelling"...."Coach, she took a couple of baby steps before shooting the ball ! That's travelling! "

I don't think one referee would complain about my "bending the rules" just a little bit!

Well, some of them would, but I wouldn't care!

Cheater.

It's not your job (certainly at any level higher than rec programs for kids in grade school) to determine how the team should play. If that becomes an issue, leave it to the league administrators.

I heard about this on Mike and Mike yesterday morning. They said that the coach did not call off the press until into the 4th quarter. This is nuts.

You talked with him at half, albeit not very forcefully. After that, I'd just get in, get done, get out. If asked, I would tell him that my opinion is that his second half approach to the game is wrong. I would then not ask him about his take, either.

I would hazard a guess that every <b>good</b> 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 <b>BOTH</b> teams. It is <b>NOT</b> your job to judge coaches and players who are playing <b>WITHIN</b> 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!

Sad, But True ...
 

Actually the coach did call off the full court press, and inserted a 1-3-1 halfcourt trap. And I understand that the assisstant coach was in acting as the head coach, as the head coach was ill, or something.

Our mercy rule is running clock in the 4th quarter when a team has a 30 point lead. If the lead goes back under 30, we do not revert back to stopping the clock.
Had a varsity girls game early this year that was a bad mismatch. Score was 58-8 at halftime, and the good team hadn't played their starters during the second quarter. The team in the lead plays in a classification two levels LOWER than the team getting beat!
Came out after the break and both coaches were waiting for us. They asked if we could run the clock the entire second half. SURE!!! 17 minutes later we were in the dressing room! Luckily one of my partners was our assignor, who is also our area's state rep.

The final score was 79-11, but it could have been 100-0 if not for a gracious coach.

I agree with JR. We have no business injecting ourselves into the game where it isn't warranted. A big spread in the score doesn't make this warranted.

Incidentally, I haven't worked either school here in basketball, but I've worked both in football. Had they played last year (don't know about this year), the score and winning team would have been very similar/same -- even with a 45 point mercy rule that doesn't kick in until the second half!

In Missouri the clock runs in the fourth quarter if a team is up by 30. It stops any time the lead goes back under 30.

First, you are THE SINGULAR minority. Second, it is not the responsibility of any official to dictate to any coach how they should/shouldn't coach their team. The job of officials is to fairly and unbiasedly apply the rules of the game to ensure that no one team or player is placed at unfair advantage/disadvantage.

There was a GV game in Alabama between two rival schools 4 years ago. One coach had been ducking the other coach for some time and would not play her. Well, the area changed and the two schools found themselves required to play one another. This game happened at the school (lets call them Mc) of the coach who was ducking the other (JL) one. Well, JL had a GREAT team - two D1 players and a D2 while Mc had noone who could dribble with their left hand.

Gym was PACKED - area game between boys tauted two of the top 5A programs at that time. JL coach decides to teach Mc's coach a lesson for ducking her all these years and rolls Mc by 45 at halftime. Final was over 100 point victory to the tune of 128 to 24. Unfortunately, I saw it as I had the boy's game afterwards. No uproar in the local media about the beat down, didn't make national news. Nice boys game though - toe on the line of a time-running-out three point attempt caused it to be a two point goal and a one point loss.

I'm not the singular minority. I've talked to college officials who have said they would do the exact same thing.

First of all, you should realize that this is a TAPPS basketball game played at a lower level than most other TAPPS games. It's not a high level of basketball and one team is not competitive. They don't deserve to be embarrassed like that and it's not bending the rules really to just call a foul when the other team presses. If it's close, it's a foul.

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.

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.

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.

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

dave30, I just want to remind you what you wrote. You said that you'd call fouls on steal attempts, suggesting that you'd call a foul even where none occurred. You said that you'd make up traveling calls. You said that you would "bend the rules," meaning fake calls, to send a message.

We said that this is unethical, inappropriate, and tantamount to cheating.

Your latest post concerns an entirely different issue, namely how to call fouls in a blowout. You allude to the standard advantage/disadvantage principle for calling fouls. These points are legitimate, but they do not concern the unethical suggestions you made in your first post in this thread.

In my opinion it would be a grave mistake and reflect a fundamental misunderstanding of officiating to conclude that the fairness of calling fouls differently based on advantage/disadvantage could possibly legitimize the approach outlined in your earlier post.

My first post came out wrong. I just wanted to point out that when a team is severely disadvantaged by any contact that I would give them the benefit of doubt as to whether the contact disrupted their play. And down by 59-0 at the half, I think any contact would be called a foul and at that level, I doubt that the defense is so good that they can steal the ball every time with no contact.

I think what dave30 meant to say, but didn't come close, was that the laws of advantage/disadvantage would be skewed somewhat due to the fact that one team sucked.

Getting rolled, score wise, doesn't mean they are any more disadvantaged by contact than a team that is competitive.

Look, I think we all understand that certain situations call for differing standards of how we call things. These changes are for neutral reasons -- keeping control of the game, getting the game over with, etc.. Dave, your tone, however, is one of "I don't like what this team is doing so I am go to change the way I call to punish them." As an official, that's unacceptable. That isn't our job.

While I think this has been overblown tremendously, I do hope the publicity from this event will lead the Fed into a mercy rule of some sort. With all the blowouts I've had in the last few years, we need this desperately.

Actually, you're close to the confusion here. When one team sucks, then it can certainly look as if you're calling fouls in their favor.

The mistake is to actually do that, rather than calling based on advantage/disadvantage.

however advantage/disadvantage is not a based on a finite set of rules -- what could be judged disadvantage to one person due to their ability could be judged advantage due to lack of said ability. Pretty much the concept tyies to weave in players ability and the guidelines of our rules to allow for a smooth and fluid game.

Judging ALL contact as equal based on advantage/disadvantage is a misapplication of the concept. As players ability are taken into consideration.

Yeah! Why couldn't I put it that way? !!

Dave, I humbly submit that if calling such a game we might all be tempted to slant the calling in favor of the poor have-nots. To what degree one would actually do this, if at all, would have to be an individual decision at the time. The one thing I think one absolutely should not do, is brag about such adjustments on the calls, whether it be before or after the fact, or hypothetically, as you have done.

"A large part of being presumed or found guilty, is the failure to keep one's mouth shut."


anonymous

Update!
 

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcont...u.2781526.html

Also: http://www.flightbasketball.com/100-...rom-Coach.html

Wow, unusual. Good for them!

At least the coach has his "integrity!" :rolleyes:

There's a story on ESPN about it now.

http://sports.espn.go.com/highschool...=ESPNHeadlines

Seems that the players on the winning team are now saying that scoring 100 points was one of the fired coach's pre-game "goals" that he wrote on the board in the locker room. The guy is a moron and has no business coaching at any level.

I expect he was looking for some media exposure. No doubt he's satisfied at this point. :rolleyes:

USAToday updates us on the subject of blowouts and philosophies....
 

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

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