The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Legal question (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/51463-legal-question.html)

just another ref Fri Feb 06, 2009 03:42pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 576435)
1.
Redirect:

A. Did the scorekeeper inform you that this player had just 4 fouls when in fact she had 5?

B. Did you have any reason to doubt the scorekeeper's information?

C. Would any experienced official have done exactly as you did under the circumstances?


Case over. You win.

1. I don't know how many she actually had. I have no book out on the court.

2. Possibly, but it is still the scorekeeper's job to count fouls, not mine.

3. Objection! You are asking my client to speculate about what others might do.

slow whistle Fri Feb 06, 2009 03:46pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 576441)
1. I don't know how many she actually had. I have no book out on the court.

2. Possibly, but it is still the scorekeeper's job to count fouls, not mine.

3. Objection! You are asking my client to speculate about what others might do.


Either there are too many lawyers on this board or you guys watched too much LA Law!! B/C some of you actually sound like you know what you are talking about!:D

Ref Ump Welsch Fri Feb 06, 2009 03:49pm

Or some of us actually have been in a courtroom, in some fashion. But then again, there must be quite a few Law and Order fans on the board, with the infiltration of those shows!

Matt Fri Feb 06, 2009 03:49pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 576435)
C. Would any experienced official have done exactly as you did under the circumstances?

Objection--speculation.

just another ref Fri Feb 06, 2009 03:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by slow whistle (Post 576442)
Either there are too many lawyers on this board or you guys watched too much LA Law!! B/C some of you actually sound like you know what you are talking about!:D


I'm not a lawyer, just not an idiot. Last extensive dealings I had in a lawyer's office was settling my father's estate. There were issues involving his wife and the possibility of "a spouse in necessitous circumstances." In laymen terms, this is called "Gimme, gimme!" The lawyer was on the phone, and I picked up a book on his desk and looked up the situation. When he hung up, I asked a question about a passage I was reading. He was surprised. "How did you find that?" It was in alphabetical order. Duh! :rolleyes:

Ref Ump Welsch Fri Feb 06, 2009 04:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 576451)
It was in alphabetical order. Duh! :rolleyes:

Another proof just because one has an advanced degree doesn't make them any smarter. I would actually take to vomiting if any lawyer starts calling themself Dr. Whatever just because the JD degree is supposedly terminal (like a PhD).

sj Fri Feb 06, 2009 04:35pm

On this type of thing. Has anybody ever seen a source which might list actual cases which have actually been brought up where officials are concerned? Win or lose. That might be interesting to see. Or does anybody know of any that have been brought up?

amusedofficial Sat Feb 07, 2009 06:40am

none
 
No legal liability whatsoever. I have seen no legal theories advanced that would make me think otherwise.

CMHCoachNRef Sat Feb 07, 2009 07:11am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mbyron (Post 576435)
1. Yes

2. No, the rules do not require disqualifying players with less than average ability who present higher-than-average risk.

Redirect:

A. Did the scorekeeper inform you that this player had just 4 fouls when in fact she had 5?

B. Did you have any reason to doubt the scorekeeper's information?

C. Would any experienced official have done exactly as you did under the circumstances?


Case over. You win.

Unless, of course, Perry Mason is the plaintiff's attorney.:D

Juulie Downs Sat Feb 07, 2009 11:07am

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef (Post 576546)
Unless, of course, Perry Mason is the plaintiff's attorney.:D

Bingo!! ( I know that's not a legal term, but it still signifies the winner!)

Here in Portland, Oregon, Perry Mason has played at noon on a certain channel since it first went into syndication back in the 60's. Every week day. When I was a child, and was home sick from school, I watched it. When I was a college student and was home from school, I watched, and now that I'm a grandmother, when my granddaughter is at my house out of school (her mother works), we watch it. Some of the episodes, I can tell you who did it, just by the title.

One thing I know for sure, Hamilton Burger was an idiot. He never learned that if Perry Mason was on the case, he ought to just give up before he even started. It would have saved LA a lot of money in all those useless trials.

Ref Ump Welsch Sat Feb 07, 2009 11:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Juulie Downs (Post 576604)
One thing I know for sure, Hamilton Burger was an idiot. He never learned that if Perry Mason was on the case, he ought to just give up before he even started. It would have saved LA a lot of money in all those useless trials.

True, but Mr. Burger would never have found the true guilty party without Mr. Mason's help. He would have had to spend some money somehow! ;)

BillyMac Sat Feb 07, 2009 06:52pm

Don't Ask Him About Foul Totals Higher Than Twenty, Please Don't ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 576441)
I don't know how many she actually had. I have no book out on the court.

Ask Mark Padgett about how he keeps track of fouls by counting his fingers, and taking off his shoes, and counting on his toes. He's what you call an expert.

BillyMac Sat Feb 07, 2009 06:55pm

Leno Versus Law And Order ???
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch (Post 576445)
There must be quite a few Law and Order fans on the board, with the infiltration of those shows!

Speaking of which, what happens to my favorite show, actually three different shows, when Leno takes over the 10:00 p.m. NBC time slot. I don't get home from my games in time to watch a 9:00 p.m. Law and Order.

BillyMac Sat Feb 07, 2009 06:59pm

Back In The Twentieth Century ...
 
We've had references to Perry Mason, and I Love Lucy, in the same week. Some of the younger officials on the Forum are scratching their head and saying, "Why are they talking about Perry Como, and Lucy from Peanuts?".

Stat-Man Sat Feb 07, 2009 10:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ranjo (Post 576429)
For what its worth -:rolleyes:

I once worked a rec league where players were allowed back into the game after 5 fouls (if there were no other players on the bench), but each additional foul also cost them a technical.:eek:


Sounds like Modified NBA rules. During a pro-level summer league, we'd invariably have games where one of the teams would only have 5 players show up, and once a player on that team picked up foul #6, NBA rules allow them to stay in the game, but every personal foul beyond six is a T (assessed to the team?) in addition to any foul shots that come with the foul.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1