My Cop/Referee Game Management Analogy

[BK]

While I am not a cop, my best buddy is and I have spent a lot of time (in the front seat) of his car. There are thousands of times when we see cars doing 4-5-6-even 8 or 9 miles per hour over the speed limit. Some get stopped, some he never flinches on, and some get tickets. I have even seen him let a guy that was too drunk to keep it between the curbs walk away. He did not know him and it was not 10 minutes before his shift was to end. I like to look at officiating with the same philosophy. Sometimes we see things that by the rule are illegal--some warrant a penalty, and some require a warning, and sometimes we just let things go. If I ever got a ticket for 1 mph over the limit--I would be guilty, but pissed--I would feel like I got picked on or treated unfairly. That is how coaches and players feel when there are minor things that happen and we call them. Most of the time when they bitch, they think that they got treated unfairly.

In this scenario, A1 is dribbling in his front court and B1 swipes at the ball and pushes it toward the floor. As it hits the floor, it simultaneously grazes A1's foot and goes into the backcourt where A1 is the first to touch the ball. By rule this is backcourt--but it is one that we can turn our head on. The same situation out of bounds, is a different deal--we can't continue to play ball if it has rolled over underneath the stands. But--if there was some minor contact on the swipe, and I passed on it--I might give the ball back to A if I feel I can get away with it. I'll trade a marginal OOB call for a marginal ticky tacker any day if I can. This has nothing to do with choosing which rules to enforce or not enforce--it is called advanced game management. I have been officiating for 8 years now and I'll be the first to admit that I would have called the back court up until a couple of years ago. When I quit being a walking rule book, I started getting more and bigger games. Maybe it's a coincidence--maybe not. It is great to know the rules--but the best officials are not always the ones with the best mechanics, etc. The officials who get the biggest games are the ones who can manage players, coaches, and themselves. By the way, I ran this scenario past 4 (Texas Division 1 officials who are doing regional tournaments) advanced guys and they all 4 said it was a no-call all the way. Does this make sense?

[Brian S]

As you can see, this is my first posting to this discussion group. However, I have been following discussions for a couple months now.

This is my first year officiating, and it is only at the grade school level. I've got to say that reading these discussions has helped me more than anything else to prepare for games, realize that I still have a lot to learn etc. Thanks to everyone for providing their insight to a rookie.

After reading your comments, I'm having a hard time with determining when it's O.K. not to call by the rules in the name of "game management". Is it something that you just learn with experience?

Or, should we always make the calls as we see them and by the rules, regardless of how minor we think the infraction may be?

Which is better officiating?

Again, I appreciate the insight from everyone.

[Just Curious]

Well BK..... Can't say as I agree with your actions or those of your cop friend....
I have read several of your posts and have found them resonable and responsible until this one....
Good luck with moving up the corporate ladder of basketball refereeing. I hope you get there quickly....
jc

[Tom Cook]

BK, While i've never ridden in a police car, I've thought of this same analogy myself. The cop, like the referee, cannot possibly punish every single violation. Therefore you have to chose the ones that significantly affect play. This is my first year at basketball, and I have passed on calls similar to the ones that you describe (although to be honest sometimes I've passed because I wasn't sure of what I saw, or didn't react quickly enough.) I do know that in our association most experienced officials will tell you that the two things that will get you into trouble fastest are your whistle and your mouth. Sometimes you just have to "let them play"!!

[Hawks Coach]

I have to support most of what you say, but the drunk driver analogy is a little over the edge for me, although I have never walked in your police officer friend's shoes and cannot say with certainty what I would do. It seems to me that the DUI is the traffic cop's equivalent of the flagrant foul, something you cannot allow to go on because of the danger involved. But deciding when to pull a speeder over is like deciding when a little physical contact has become too much physical contact. A little bit of judgment is called for in both circumstances.

[walt]

BK, I had the first scenario and described it almost exactly in a post I made on January 31, 2000. I made the backcourt call. I think some people may pass on it because as someone pointed out, it may have happened too quickly, they weren't sure what exactly happened, they didn't see the whole play, ok I understand. That being said, I agree there are times when a pass may be warranted (i.e. is the contact a foul, advantage/disadvantage) and we've all done it. In this situation, and we may agree to disagree, the rules and the casebook are pretty clear on team control and back court situations. By passing, you better be ready to explain it (if the coaches know the rule) because a coach will surely point out that you've clearly ignored a rule. You have not used your judgment (i.e. was the contact a foul, advantage/disadvantage). To quote Dennis Miller, "that's just my opinion, I could be wrong."

[BK]

I think the DUI thing could relate to us in a situation like a coach you have already T'd once and he didn't get the message, but you just didn't want to deal with the hassle of writing him up and listening to the fans, etc. I think that this guy was just a couple of blocks from his house and my buddy just didn't feel like toasting this guy. Maybe he wasn't that drunk, but just a bad driver. I don't know what was said between the two in that case, but I respected him for having the compassion to let one go. This might be a little extreme for an official, but the point is the same. How about the time when a player secures a rebound and is bent over when airborne B2 lands near on his butt. Sometimes, if no advantage is gained, we will just let things play on--while everyone in the gym wants a foul. Everyone know's that he's guilty, but we play on anyway cause no harm was done. Thanks.

[Todd VandenAkker]

I'll just throw my 2 cents worth in here, too. Giving the ball OOB to the team that may have been fouled but you passed on it is good game management. It doesn't happen all that frequently in any one game, but does occur. Better flow to the game if you just give it right back. Same with rebounds and other situations--pass on the contact if no advantage gained. The backcourt situation, though, is pretty cut and dry in most respects. If it last touches a player from Team A, you have a violation when he touches it. True, it might seem like Team A is getting a bum rap, yet who is to say that wasn't simply good defense and the dribbler didn't protect the ball well enough? Most coaches know this aspect of the backcourt rule, and will let you know it if they come up on the wrong side of your decision to "turn your head the other way." I wouldn't consider making that call being a "walking rule book," particularly since you're willing to show some discretion on those other types of situations. It simply lends itself to less discretion than those others. Good overall philosophy, though. You'll no doubt have smoother games with good "flow" by not over-refereeing minor contact.

[This message has been edited by Todd VandenAkker (edited February 28, 2000).]

[pizanno]

Must agree (as usual) with Todd.

If you're saving a foul, awesome presence to maintain the flow.

But in the backcourt call, reward the defense, no reason NOT to call that one.

Backcourt is not a subjective call. Would you not call OOB if someone stepped on the line without contact from the defense?

Otherwise, your philosophy is right on.

btw- can't agree with letting the DWI go...too many innocent deaths on the road. I've lost friends to multiple-offense drunk drivers remaining behind the wheel.

[This message has been edited by pizanno (edited March 01, 2000).]

[Brian Watson]

On fouls and other "judgement" calls I agree, a no-call is sometimes the best call. But I don't know how you could make a "judgement" call on a violation. It happened or it didn't. You could show a clip of a foul to five different officials and possibly come away with five different calls. Show a clip of a violation, and there should be five of the same call.

[Bart Tyson]

Brian, while it is true, 5 officials will say it is a violation, that doesn't mean 5 officials will call the violation. Sometimes it depends several factors. the obvious is the level of game. Is the game going to be reviewed by supervisor i.e. D1-level. You have a D1 game, then you probably should call the travel 35' form the basket, which was no advantage. D2 game you probably don't call the travel. I agree there are some violations you don't over-look.

[Brian Watson]

True. The first thread seemed to reference a reserve or varsity game, although D1 would be included, and my theory is you really shouldn’t overlook a violation at that level. Because the of the skill expectation of player and officials it should be called. I would never (and I don’t) call every “by-the-book” violation for middle school and some freshman games; I have an aversion to 6 hour games. I wish that NBA (and even some D1) ref(s) could come see some of these games at the middle school level. They should see the kids who have few skills, (purposely?) taking two or three steps to impersonate their favorite star.

It is interesting that BK says most refs move up when they start letting the “marginal” violations go. It has been my experience, and this may be a difference in the state or region, but most middle school coaches don’t mind when you look the other way on a “marginal” violations as long as your consistent. But at the higher levels these calls are where the coaches bust your chops.
I had a situation earlier this year where a jumper went hard off the back of the rim, almost straight up. I was the lead, but I had moved out far enough that I saw the ball touch that strap that connects the top of the board to the supports to move it up and down. My partner should have called it from the trail, but didn’t, so I made the call about the same time the coach started to go off on my partner. By the book I really should not have made the call as the lead, however I did see it. My partner was a little put off because he said “it barley touched”, but it was a reserve game and everyone saw it. My opinion, it was the right call for that level and it prevented problems later in the game. There are a bunch of what ifs but…What if I hold my whistle, and my partner T’s up that coach on the next trip down? That’s situation would be life, but I would have felt like I didn’t do my best because I ignored a call. I am interested, what everyone thinks, should I have held the call and overlooked an obvious violation?

[Bart Tyson]

Brian, I would have made the call. I don't think you over look any oob unless its not your line. I havn't seen anything in the mechanics that says your are not to see or make the call you described. I think your partner was wrong to not make that call. Now if your not 110% sure it hit the support, then you pass on the call.

[jackgil]

Bart -

You absolutely did the right thing. Even if it was not your call to make, if you SAW it you should call it. This is not a call that is restricted to only the lead or trail making. It depends on who has the best view and is SURE it hit the straps. Believe me I don't know how many times this has happened and IT REALLY IRKS coaches when nothing is called. It shouldn't matter if it BARELY touches ... its like saying the ball barely touched the OOB line. It is either in or it is out. It either went out of bounds or it did not.

[Brian Watson]

I actually haven’t looked in the official’s manual to see what it states but… The way I was taught mechanics, and the generally accepted mechanic in my area is the trail calls all violations involving the basket (i.e. goaltending, basket interference, missed iron on FT, and hitting the strap, etc.) Theory or thinking is the lead should be watching the lane and the bodies, not the ball. It makes sense, and you and your partner know which primary area to watch. Problem is situation like mine where guys feel they were “stepped” on in their primary. It is kind of like calling a baseline violation from the trail.