this question was posed this weekend at a meeting.

if you were a supervisor of a conference would you rather have a referee that was a good game manager, or a good play caller?

though these talents go hand in hand with being a great referee, which official would you rather have to work a tough basketball game and why?

after people have resonded i will type the opinions of an nba referee, and a college supervisor.

Game Manager.
 

Now for those that do not understand this answer, that does not mean you cannot be good at both or in my opinion you or both are not important, but I think game management is much more important. You are going to miss plays. We all miss plays from time to time. If all you can do is call plays and you cannot prevent things from happening you might have to call things.

But that is just me.

Peace

Play caller
 

If you had to pick just one, I would go for a btter play caller (obviously a good referee is balanaced in oth - they are not mutually exclusive).

Here is my reasoning:

Say your "Play Caller" get 99% of the calls right, and has huge game management problems, while your "Game Manager" can manage the game, but only gets, say, 65% of the calls (or no calls) right.

When the play caller kicks a call (1%) there will probably be a game management issue arising. If need be his (or her) partners, referees supervisor or even players/coaches can help out with game management.

On the other hand, when the "Game Manager" kicks a call - there is nobody that can resuce the referee.

In a nutshell, game management can be helped by others - only the referee watching the play can make the call.

As has been discussed before (and as Rut pointed out), you need to be a good play caller <b> and </b> have good game management skills to handle all situations. And I would imagine that the league supervisor's answer was that he would want a "good game manager" because he probably assumes that anyone at that level has already mastered the play calling or they wouldn't be there.

However, in my <i>personal</i> experience, I can help my partner manage the game even if he is a little green and starts to sweat when the heat gets turned up. However, I can't help him when he doesn't know the rules and makes calls incorrectly that I don't witness (because I'm always watching off ball like I'm supposed to be, of course). :-)

Part of my pre-game conference is that we get together when anything weird happens. That way, we can manage the game together. For calls in his primary area, I can't be much help.

Z

I do not think that is the issue here.
 

Man, you are obsessed over this rule thing. I do not think this discussion was started to address the importance or lack of importance over rules knowledge. Officiating has many sides to it, rules knowledge is not the most important one. If it was, assignors at the college and pro level would never move you up until you pass a test. And unless you have done both HS and college level games (sometimes Men's and Women's) you will always have challenges with rules.

I watched a young official tonight mess up on a rule, not a single person said a thing. Not a fan, not a coach, no one!! He stopped counting 10 seconds in the backcourt when the count clearly should not have ended and I think I was the only one that noticed. Well his partner noticed, but we did not take him out back and beat him senseless because of it. I told him asked him about it so he could learn from the situation and we moved on.

Man, basketball is not Football or Baseball when everything you do is based solely on a rule. In Football alone there is over 200 rules differences from NF to NCAA. Do you think the officials that do both do not scratch their head sometimes and wonder if they did things correct? Of course they do, and when they realize they messed up, they move on and learn from that experience. Most of the basketball rules that most officials have are not every day rules. And usually it has more to do with their judgement then their knowledge of that particular rule. I have personally been caught off guard when those unusual things happen in a basketball game, more than I did not understand or have knowledge of the rule.

There is a reason you here the phrase, "call the obvious."

Peace

As a coach and fan, game management is more important to me. As y'all generously point out, most non-referees (including players) don't have a clue about the rules. Although spectators and participants sometime correctly boo a kicked call, most of the time we don't know what we're howling about. So, its critical that a referee manage the flow of
the game, the consistency of the calls, and the intensity of
the coaches and players, and sometimes, the fans.

When I recall the worst games I've been a part of, its not
the calls I remember, but how the games got out of hand because coaches, players and/or fans didn't control their behavior, and referees didn't nip it in the bud early, and control it throughout. Don't get me wrong - I'm not blaming the referees for bad behavior of others, but it only takes one referee puking on my shoes to shut me up.

Game Manager
 

I'd prefer a good game manager. I think that they in fact go hand in hand, good game manager's tend to have the ability to be good play callers as well. With the inflated egos of players and coaches that is part of the game today, I believe it's important to have the ability to take care of business without the whistle. While having said that, a good game manager will know when enough is enough and use the whistle.

"I did not know we all had to think alike." - JRutledge
 

He's not obsessed, he's simply stating his opinion. Isn't it you who always says we don't all have to think alike? You whine and cry, when others disagree with you, that you're entitled to your opinion. Well, guess what. Others are entitled to their opinion, too.

Don't whine about others disagreeing with you and then pop off when they express their opinion.

Tastes great! Less filling! Tastes great...

This topic has been beaten to death. Anyway, from what I
can tell, the goal of any supervisor worth his salt is to

1. have the correct number of refs show up on time
2. not get a call from irate coaches after
3. not have bad press concerning his game.

<i> Man, you are obsessed over this rule thing. </i>

Oh yeah, I'm obsessed about it Rut. My apologies if I expressed my opinion on a thread. Unlike you, I have never started a thread on this topic. I have just chimed in with my opinion. I guess we all have a right to our opinion unless it conflicts with yours. But then again, you say everyone has a right to their own opinion, we don't have to agree, and you don't care what anyone else says. Obviously, your actions speak much louder than your words.

Z

OK Master Tony
 

Tony, stay out of the conversation or read everything that was said before this point. Zeberman brought up this discussion here on another post no one even made an issue over this "rules knowledge vs. presence" discussion. We are not talking about rules knowledge at all. We are talking about game management and calling the game. Who knows the rules is not the issue.

Yeah, you are right Tony, I base my life one what a bunch of officials not in any of my gerisdiction of officiating. If I am whining, then you need to base your conversation on what I say to you. I do not think your name is zebraman. But then again this is the internet. ;)

Peace

I do not think the question has anything to do with anything other than game management and play calling. And not only that, crew addressed that he had this converation with assignors and evaluators too. We all might learn something because I have never heard you express how many games you assign for a particular conference. If all these individuals think the better officials have their hair colored blond and with a Grizzly Adams beard is what they want to see, it might help you as you begin to move up or explore other officiting options.

You are right, you have a right to give your opinion, but I have the right to give mine too. :)

Peace

What exactly is meant by "play-calling" then, JRutledge??? Doesn't one need to have rules knowledge in order to "call plays" on the court?? You have, again, brought up the discussion, and then when someone expresses an opinion different than yours, you pop-off to them - again...and one someone else points that out to you, you tell him to stay out of the conversation...so explain to us EXACTLY what you mean by "play calling" and how that has nothing to do with knowing the rules, please...

Sorry, I did not start this conversation.
 

Man, I get blamed for everything. :) Sorry crew started this issue and made a post about it. I will let him answer that question.

We spend half the time talking about philosophy, storys of things we have experienced, camp issues and shoes on this board. If basketball is a sport that has many challenges based entirely on rules, why do we hardly ever discuss play or situations where the rules are not clear to us? Go look at the baseball and football boards both here and on McGriff board. You tell me then what the nature of those discussions are.

Peace

I don't care about the baseball or football boards...I will also say that my answer to the original question - which is more important: play-calling or game management - is undeniably game management...all supervisors are looking for good game managers...they can teach us what to call and what not to call, but can't really teach us how to calm a coach or handle ugly situations...having said that, I will also add that you had better be able to make correct calls, because you aren't going to get to make a whole lot of mistakes in your first few years at an "upper level"...but play-calling and rules knowledge are the same thing...

Who made that an issue?
 

OK and your point is? :confused:

I personally did not make that claim, but have to disagree completely. Only because if I have knowledge of a rule, does not mean I will apply it correctly or call it correctly. Just because I understand the definition of "contact", does not mean I will call a foul properly or that others will call it the same as me. So I really do not understand how they are the same. But to each his own.


Peace

[Edited by JRutledge on Jun 14th, 2002 at 02:13 PM]

Rut,

Maybe it would be useful if you could post "Rut's rules" here on the board to make sure we don't ever obsess or join in on a discussion that we should "stay out of." You know, things like:

1) This is a basketball officials discussion board, but there is no place for basketball <i> rules </i> discussion here.

2) Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Unless it contradicts mine.

3) I don't care what anyone thinks of me or my posts. But if you disagree with me, I will continue to debate until I get the last word.

4) Conforming with a particular assignor's beliefs is much more important than calling the best game that I have been trained to do. You should all feel that way too. My goal is to be a D1 official. Since that is my goal, it should be everyone's goal.

5) If I continue to dredge up an old point and make a new post about it every time I see an article supporting my position, that is just good discussion. If you make a post that doesn't agree with my viewpoint, you are obsessive.

6) I get blamed for everything. You are all out to get me and none of it us brought on by my abrasive posts.

7) If someone agrees with a poster who contradicted my opinion, they need to stay out of the discussion.

Add some more Rut so I can be sure to please you. :-)

Z

It seems to me, from reading the replies related to the topic, that a good case could be made for both game management ability and play calling ability. If you have the desire to move into the upper levels of officiating, why would you not try to find out what the evaluators at your target level place the emphasis on and make that the area in which you concentrate your efforts? That applies in every area. You can be the best game manager ever to walk the earth, but if you want to work in XYZ Conference and their evaluator thinks game management skills are irrelevant you are SOL.

Guess it depends on why you officiate. Personally, I do it because I enjoy it. Have no desire to ever go higher than HS varsity and my officiating goal is to be the best I can possibly be given the time I can put into the craft after tending to God, my family and my profession (in that order). I can be happy officiating no higher than 8th grade if necessary. Therefore I am going to work on both areas and let the chip falls as they may. If evaluators think I am unfit for HS varisty, I couldn't care less (the assignor I worked for this last year respects my ability and has committed to keep using me).

Besides, being good at both are not mutually exclusive.

Re: OK Master Tony
 

Little Jeffrey, the last time I checked, this was a discussion forum, which allows anyone to respond to anyone. If you're whining? Since you whine all the time, it's assumed that you always have cheese and crackers on hand! ;)

Piece

I have got a couple for you Z.
 

Where do you live?

Are in my associations that I belong?--And if you are, does not mean I will work with you. I belong to 3 basketball associations and with the expection of the one that is directly in the city, I do not see or work with guys in any of my conferences I work.

Just look at the first page of topics on this board, tell me how many are rules discussions? Then go over to the other sports and tell me how many they are regularly having? You can discuss anything you like, but for something that seems to be so important, why do we here almost never have regular discussions about it? I guess officials all over the place are not having problems with rules ever. I just find it interesting something that is so important, and we do not even discuss them. But how many times have we had this discussion, and how many times have we discussed things like camps and shoes and officials-coach confrontations? But rules is the most important of all of that? And when we do have a rules discussion, it is some fan or coach that thinks it is travelling if the ball does not hit the rim on a shot and the shooter recovers the ball themselves.

I can't remember or care about anything you had said in the past day, let alone over a long period of time. Partly because in my world I do not at all care about our differences, because the last time I checked, differences were apart of life. I hope you pay that close attention to your family as you do by the things I say.

Peace

Whatever Tony.
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

Little Jeffrey, the last time I checked, this was a discussion forum, which allows anyone to respond to anyone. If you're whining? Since you whine all the time, it's assumed that you always have cheese and crackers on hand! ;) Piece

When you are a clinician at one of the camps I attend, then and only then will I consider to even care about your position the way you seem to care about my position on this. You are so right Tony, I only care what one or two think on a discussion board and they do not even live even close to where I do. You need to keep a little perspective.

Peace

play calling-in my opinion and the way i feel it is directed toward the question, is about judgement on plays. (i.e. block/charge, goaltending/not goaltending, no-call vs where a whistle is needed.) when i think play calling i am thinking about beating the tape.

game management-in my opinion is knowing the penalty situations and other areas requiring less judgement but application of management/rules. (i.e. people skills, clock management, switches, things behind the scenes that t.v. and fans do not pick up on)

i have to go now but try to chew on this info and i will elaborate and clarify later.

You da man, Z!! :D

That's the definition of a "good" official!You know the rules,you know how and when(or if) to apply the rules,and you know how to manage a game.Some officials can do it and some will never be able to do it. "Good" officiating isn't exclusive to the D1 mens or higher levels,either.

Good post,Larry.

Tony I have a great way to solve you problem.
 

DO NOT READ ANYTHING I SAY. DO NOT RESPOND TO ANYTHING I SAY, DO NOT CARE ABOUT ANYTHING I SAY.

I hope you feel better now.

Peace

Like I said Rut, your actions speak WAY louder than your words.

Oh and by the way, I have never participated in any discussion about shoes. :-)

Have the last word.

Z

Gotcha Crew...I guess I look at it just the opposite...how can you have judgement to tell whether it is a block/charge or goaltending/not goaltending unless you know what the rule about each of those is...I do believe play-calling is the easy part of our job and game management the difficult part...

follow up
 

being a good referee encompasses these 2 traits. it is difficult to seperate the 2. there are many areas of officiating that game management and play calling that cant be seperated.

an nba referee, a college supervisor(d1), and also a d1 coach answered this question.

supervisor chose a game manager
nba ref chose a play caller
d1 coach chose a play caller
i chose a play caller

the reason i chose a play caller is because i do not want a coach to go to a press conference show a clip of the game and be able to hang his hat on a few plays i got wrong at the end of the game among other reasons(this was the main one)

the askee said that there is no right or wrong answer it is just a personal preference which an official finds more important even if it is just slightly more. i am not saying anyone hear is right or wrong i was just curious to see other peoples opinions.

btw there were about 50 refs in the room and only 3 chose play caller. i did not want to think the game managers were out numbered. it is certainly a difficult decision.

Whatever Z.
 

OK Z you win. You would turn down a Final Four assignment because you might work with an official that is not up to your rules standards, I would not. To each his own.

Peace

OK - here's my two cents for what it's worth. Theoretically, if I had to choose between a good play caller/bad game manager and a bad play caller/good game manager (although I can't imagine things being that cut and dried), I would choose the good play caller every time.

Why? Because it would be much harder for me to compensate for a bad play caller (this would involve doing things I preach against such as make-up calls, figuring out a way to overrule a partner, deflecting crap from the howler monkeys toward him, etc.) than it would be to compensate for a bad game manager. I think its because I have enough self-confidence (some would say ego - OK, most would) in my own fantastic game management skills that I could easily overcome any problems a partner might cause.

Of course, that doesn't include standing between a partner and Bobby Knight, for example. ;)

Re: Play caller
 

YES!! YES!! YES!! I could not have said it better myself. Great call Duane!!

My take on this whole situation:

You get the call right - half the fans, players, & coaches think you're wrong.

You completely blow the call - half the fans, players, & coaches think you're wrong.

While terrible rule knowledge will show through, I much prefer to work with someone who's at 100% on management and 75% on rules than 75% management/100% rules.

My take on this whole situation:

You get the call right - half the fans, players, & coaches think you're wrong.

I don't give a rats patoot.

You completely blow the call - half the fans, players, & coaches think you're wrong.

I don't give a rats patoot.

While terrible rule knowledge will show through, I much prefer to work with someone who's at 100% on management and 75% on rules than 75% management/100% rules.

I couldn't work comfortably with someone who got one out of every four calls wrong for an entire game. Furthermore, no one could possibly have such incredible game management skills that they could deflect comments and placate everyone when they get that many obvious calls wrong.

Camp Tonight.
 

I was at the Moody Bible camp tonite and had an assignor say this to my partner.

"Your mechanics are what tell you what kind of an official you are. If you do not have good mechanics, you will tell everyone how confident you are in your calls."

Maybe this does not have to do directly with this conversation, but it kind of goes along with just being a play caller or not. I do think your mechanics kind of indirectly have to do with how you manage the game.

Interesting comment I thought. And something I have always agreed with.

Peace

Re: Camp Tonight.
 

So does that mean that now the question is: would you rather work with a partner who has (a) good play calling ability, (b) good game management skills, or (c) good mechanics?

I'm all for good mechanics, and as I've said before, I worked really really hard on my mechanics. But I know very good officials with lousy mechanics, and average officials wtih really good mechanics. I don't think there's a correlation. Good officials tend to have good mechanics, b/c they've worked hard on all aspects of their game; but I would disagree wtih the blanket statement that mechanics tell what kind of an official you are.

Chuck

Not really.
 

Your mechanics tells everyone in the gym what you got. They tell everyone that you are in position to make a call, and finally they tell everyone how confident you are about what you are doing.

Now I personally would not say it is the most important factor in choosing an official, but it is high up there. It sure as hell tells me what my partner has or has called, and I do not have to guess. That makes my life very easy I will say that.

In the end this is all personal choice and preference. Of course I would love to always work with officials that have the total package. But the reality is that many officials, including myself are better at one aspect of the game and not that good at others. And in my experience in basketball, officials have a much harder time with the mechanics and the game management aspect to officiating much more than the other sports.

Peace

Re: Camp Tonight.
 

Occasionally, I work with a guy who, frankly, isn't better than mediocre, but he always yells his calls at the top of his lungs. I guess some might think this means he is extremely confident of his decisions, but I think just the opposite. I think he is yelling as an artificial means to "sell" his calls because he knows he is frequently wrong - and believe me, he is.

Now, what does this have to do with good mechanics and having confidence in your calls? I guess I mean you would have to identify which part of good mechanics indicates you have confidence in your calls. Part of good mechanics is communicating with your partner on the result of a call you make, but that does not indicate confidence, in my opinion. Certainly I agree that there are some parts of good mechanics that contribute to your confidence, such as being in proper position, etc., but also remember that being confident in your calls does not make them right.

I too work very hard on my mechanics, (yes, even this time of year when I'm just doing leagues and tourneys) and take pride in doing them by the book.

However....I would put mechanics at the bottom of the list as to what I find important in a partner. So long as I know what my partner is calling, I couldn't care less if his/her arm is straight, if they raise their arm before pointing direction on an out-of-bounds, if they come to a full stop at the table before reporting a foul, or even if they add some "NBA theatrics" to their calls (you know, the block call where they bounce their fists off their hips instead of doing it right).

Extremely sloppy mechanics might make a coach tend to pick on a ref a little more because they "sense blood," but I've only seen that in newbies.

Z

Newbies?
 

You are going to tell me that only newbies get hassled? You are kidding right?

Peace

Thanks, Z. That's what I was trying to say.

Chuck

Tough question. I would probably go with game manager although no game manager can make up for being an absolutely terrible play caller. I think players, coaches, and fans get pissed off when they believe the calls are stacking up against them and I don't just mean the foul count. The perception of whether a game is called fairly or not is very important. When the players, coaches, and fans leave the game they want to feel like the officials gave them a fair shake, not so much that every play was called correctly.
Please don't think I mean that if a play is absolutely missed that we now have to make up that call. I don't mean that at all. We just chalk that up as miss. What I am talking about is if my partner has a drive to the basket with borderline contact on one end of the floor that I think should of been a foul and he passes I need to remember that and if a borderline contact drive occurs on the other end I need to pass on it as well.
If I notice Kenyon Martin getting too rough in the post on a couple of possessions the next time he gets rough I need to call a foul to settle him down. However, a referee with no game management skills might look at the play I called a foul and say that was too cheap. He or she would not understand that you need to take into account what happened before because if you don't Kenyon will continue to play rough and that player he is matched up with will start to get pissed off and retaliate. Now you might say why don't you get a foul on him from the start. Well, let's say if you go black and white it is too cheap to call a foul the first time. However, referees need to use the accumulation theory. Several touchy contact plays equal one foul. The same follows for handchecking with me. If a player does it a couple of times and I pass on it the next time he does it, although it might be light, I am going to call a foul just to send a message to him to get his hands off so I don't have to make tough decisions all night. The official with no game management skills would look at the play I called a foul and say it was too cheap.
Game management to mean also means that on borderline plays that occur in the last two minutes when the game is out of reach should go the team's way that is down. Again, I am not talking about black and white plays. I am talking about plays that you are not sure about that are tough that could go either way.
Similarly, late in a close game I would not want a tempo setting handcheck or off ball foul called unless it involves an advantage/disadvantage. Now if you looked at the play by itself not in the context of the game you would say it is a foul.
When your partner has had several calls go against team A you need to recognize it. When you have a double whistle with him or her and the foul is against team A you need to take it. Similarly, if their is a foul against team B let him or her take it even if in your primary.
Getting the ball in play quickly after a tough call or after a techncial foul is good game managing.
If a game is going smooth and there is no problems you can pass on borderline plays. If the game is getting rough and out of control you need to call it tighter. I think it is very important to not look at plays just by themselves. You have relate them to what has been called earlier, what the players are doing and how they are adjusting, and what the time and score is. You can't take each play on it's own merit even if by itself you get play after play right. The key to managing a good game is the tough borderline plays. Too many people think game managing is about evening up the foul count or schmoozing the coaches. That is not what it is about to me. OK, I know I went too long. This is a tough argument though with strong points on both sides.

Re: Re: Play caller
 

Gee Mark...you agreed with me?? Maybe I should rethink my answer ;) (only kidding....)

I still say this is a bit of a no-brainer. It comes down to my point that you (as the "other" referee) can compensate if you are partnered with a ref that has poor game management skills - there is not much you can do to make up for a ref that is not making the right calls....

But hey - that's just my personal opinion, I (unlike some here) have no problem with people disagreeing with me - that is the essence of discussion, voicing, and listening to, different opinions.

Great post, Eli. Especially about being aware of who has been calling fouls against which team. If I've called the last 5 fouls against white, I know I'd appreciate it if my partner jumped in and took the next white foul away from me. In fact, I make sure to mention this in my pregame. The only thing I would say about your post regards the following comment:

I would say that the fan's perception of a fairly called game is not nearly as important as actually calling the game fairly. I couldn't care less about what the fan thinks as long as my assignor says that I called a good game. I know that on the pro level, the game is for the fans, but you and I both know that the fans don't know diddly about what a fairly called game is. So my feeling is that I go and call a fair game and let whatever chips fall where they may. Just my opinion.

Chuck

I'm with you here, Eli.
...Especially when you have been asking him to "clean it up" all night.
I get tired of baby sittin'.
mick

eli,
as usual you argue a very strong case. though i think quite a bit of your "book" falls under the umbrella of play calling as well as game management. i feel that one of the best assets of being a great play caller is knowing when to call or not to call borderline fouls, accumulation fouls, and to also utilize play memorization.(play memorization-rough definition-taking a snap shot of "tough" plays that you or your partners have called and calling the same "tough" play consistently all night) these points could arguably be used in both definitions of play calling and game managing. also calling plays that "fit" the game (i feel) falls more towards the play calling side. again, that point can be argued both ways.

in the context that the question was asked, "would you rather have some one that is a game manager or play caller?", i feel we should seperate the two more definitively, put aside the points that can be considered falling under both categories and differentiate the 2.

Did this last weekend. Couple of trips down the court in the first quarter, told a player to knock off the hand check. Third trip down the court, same hand check. Tweet! No more hand check.

There is no correct answer to this question. You need to be both a "good play caller" as well as a "good game manager." This is somewhat of a trick question- plus I have to admit, I was in the same meeting the person who started the original thread was in and had insight to the "answer." You know what they say...information is power!

No, there isn't. But everyone has an opinion on it! :)

I have not checked in on ths thread, bcause I was waiting to see how crew "managed" the discussion, since I think his "call" in asking the question was wrong.

I am reminded of a time when my daughter was being particularly difficult and troublesome and I asked the counselor I was seeing which was more important, "Discipline or love?" She said, "It's all important." That's literally, word for word, all she said. That was five years ago and I'm still chewing over it with my daughter 3000 miles away, and three different children being difficult.

I think it fits here. The people at the top like Eli, Drake, and others who do the best basketball in the world, have it all. You simply can't succeed without all the above, can you?

The bottom line is that GAME MANAGEMENT skills are what seperate a "Good" official from a "Great" official.

Anyone can call a game. Few can manage a game.

Perhaps; but not just anyone can call a game well. It's not as simple a thing as you make it sound. As this entire thread makes clear, the issue is not as cut-and-dried as you make it seem.

Chuck

[ As this entire thread makes clear, the issue is not as cut-and-dried as you make it seem.

Chuck [/B][/QUOTE

And it never will be...I work for two different collegiate supervisors...one puts huge importance on calling the game correctly, the other stresses the game management side...when I am in gym A, I know I better do things one way, but when in gym B, I know I better do things this other way...be as good as possible at both aspects of the game, and do what your supervisors direct you to do...

I have to agree with Rockyroad...you call the game the way the way your area wants it to be called, it is up to the assignor what he wants....a game where all the calls were made....or whether the game was managed well. To me a great official is one that is able to adapt to any situation that he/she is thrown into!

AK ref SE

My opinion!

I think it fits here. The people at the top like Eli, Drake, and others who do the best basketball in the world, have it all.

Well stated, Juulie. I prefer to work with folks who have both, and my goal is to have both. I believe it is compromising to say you need one more than the other.

Crew
I was at Proactive Camp with you. The comments here are about as varied as at camp. It can be blamed on me since Shawn & I started this discussion during a tape review. I thought Coach Odom gave the best response.....he kept changing his mind the more he thought about it. I was one of the majority. While I believe getting the play right is important, how many times have we heard in camps and clinics that all coaches want is to manage the game? If you want to discuss things in detail contact me a [email protected]

Have a good summer.

So, Don is the blame for all of this! ;)

Actually, this is an ongoing discussion that will probably never end. It seems to me that there are actually 3 options. Either you wnat to be a grat manager, a great caller, or you want to be both. I have to agree with others who have said that they want to have both. How could anyone disagree with that? :confused:

One thing about crew, he can also generate discussion! :p

WRONG!! WRONG!! WRONG!! There is only one correct way to call the game, that is how the rules and and casebook plays are written and interpreted by the rules committee. I am tired of coaches and assigners deciding how rules are to be interpreted and applied. This is how we get into all of these long winded discussions about advantage/disadvantage and other nonsense.

Sigh.

Mark, you may be tired of it, but that's life. It's Darwinism as applied to officiating. If the NFHS had assigning authority, we'd all be happy as clams to do it exactly as the rulebook lays it out. But if I want to get games (and keep getting them), I have to officiate the way my assignor tells me to. Otherwise, he'll stop giving me games. That's just the way it works. I'm sorry you're tired of it, Mr. Quixote; maybe it's time to find a new windmill. ;)

Chuck

Play caller
 

If you're not getting them right, you better be the best game manager of all time. I think you can learn management as you mature, if you aren't working your angles correctly you will struggle. Hey, if you are getting them right, you don't have that much to manage!

i disagree, following this philosophy will not get you hired by any leagues. it will however make you stand out and make it easier for the supervisor to scratch your name off the list.

remember the rome philosophy!