To reach or not reach

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Did your partner take home an equal game check?
Does the "exceptional" official get paid more for the extra calls which you advocate that he should make for his lesser partner?

Somehow I don't think this thread has anything to do with money.

Do you really want to know what I would have done had my partner made a such a travel call directly in front of me?

If I deemed that the player didn't travel by rule, I would sound my whistle a couple of times and loudly say, "No travel. That's an inadvertent whistle," and then quickly administer a throw-in to the team which had the ball. If that embarrasses the other official, that's too bad.

The phrase "two wrong don't make a right" comes to mind.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

fiasco:

It is obvious from your posts, that you are either a very very inexperienced basketball official or a troll. I have decided that you are a very very inexperienced basketball official and not a troll. I am not going to tell you my basketball officiating background because there are many many members of this board that will tell you that like the E.F. Hutton commerials of old, when I speak, people listien (at least they humor me and act like they are listening, ).

Now listen carefully, and I do mean listen and do what I tell you. Your first responsibility is to officiate your primary coverage area (PCA), and NOT officiate your partner(s) PCA. I can assure you that with ten (10) players running around on a court that is only 50 ft by 84 ft (H.S. dimensions) in size, you will have all the more than enough to do without worrying about your partner(s) PCA.

With regard to fishing in my pond when you have enough fish in your own pond, you can bet your sweet bippy (Google Rowan and Martin's Laugh In) that the conversation that we have will be one sided and I will be doing talking and you will be doing the listen, and if you still insist in fishing in my pond I have the experience to make the rest of our game a living hell for you. And I can do it while still looking and acting professional.

So get your head and a$$ wired together (ask a Marine what that means) and get rid of the notion that you and only you have the correct call on everything that happens on the basketball court even if it happens in your partner(s) PCA.

Am I irritated with your attitude right now? Yes I am. I just wish that you could attend a basketball officials camp and I could be a staffer at that camp. Your attitude would go over with that camp staffers like a lead ballon.

I will end this lecture at this point.

MTD, Sr.

I may only have 22 years in this game, but when an experienced partner fishes in my pond, I normally respond with a "thank you." It's cause I was screened off or had other duties to attend to.

I hear the 25/75 studies passed around and I can honestly say I hope I pass on the ones that would've been incorrect calls. I do see things in my periphery but hope I have the experience and patience to pass on all those except those that need to be called.

The threatening part of this post I find disappointing, quite frankly. I do not sit and listen to halftime lectures from crusty old vets -- perhaps because I've slipped into those ranks myself without even realizing it. And sometime I am unhappy about a partner and what he does on the floor, but thankfully the game of basketball has a clock and I can spend my energies working the game and then getting out of Dodge as soon as I can afterwards. I'm certainly not wasting my energy on a "lecture" the guy wouldn't listen to in the first place.

[tomegun]

Wow, there sure is a lot of information in this thread. I missed this one because I've been at a camp and them working a "tryout" with pro rules. I only mentioned that because some pro terminology has been thrown around in this thread.

1. The pro game is different from the standpoint of off-ball fouls. Plus, with the size and skill of the players, angles are way more important and I feel that is a reason why officials may call out of what would traditionally be considered their primaries. In these situations, I appreciate the help.
2. There is a difference when talking about the high school or college game where the offenses/defenses require more attention off-ball. Take your best pro official and he/she would not call a college game the same way or it would confuse their partners (who normally do college). There goes part of the validation for comparison.
3. Officials like/love to watch the ball and that is why people always want to find a reason for doing it. For those (of us) officials who understand the fact that you don't call everything you see and you don't see everything, it burns us up when a ball-watcher is recognized.
4. What about team officiating? Everyone can't be the quarterback? Somebody has to do some zone blocking without watching the ball go down field. While all these plays are being recognized to "get it right" who is watching the hen house? How many threads to we have on here about getting a play off ball right? If all your partners need so much help with position adjustments, maybe you should be contacting your assigner, instructional chair or board member.
5. IMO, a good/experienced official knows when to reach and when to leave things alone.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I may only have 22 years in this game...

Does everyone realize that the amount of training, local games, etc. can make 5 years the equivalent to 20? Raise your hand it you've ever known an official who thought they deserved assignments because of how long they have been on the board regardless of their skill level. Yep, I thought everyone would raise their hand on that one.

Rich, nothing against you because I don't know you. I just wanted to point that out.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

The bottom line here - imho - is that if you see something that needs to be called to keep the game from going down the toilet, then call it for God's sake. If one of your partners gets all bent because it was "in my primary", then you can discuss it later. He/she probably won't change their point of view, (as fiasco said, that's an ego problem on their part), but you know you did what was best for the game. I learned long ago that the pyramid starts with 1)Protect the integrity of the game.

And MTD, Sr., I think maybe you are overreacting just a little bit (well, actually a lot). The way I read this thread, I don't see fiasco saying that he does this "fishing in your pond" on a regular basis. If that's the case, then sure there is a problem. But with your lengthy career, you know good and well that there are times when you have seen something happen in a partner's primary, and you thought "Holy sh!t!!" and you have made that call. And if the partner was upset, you discussed it later. You made that call because it was 1)the right call, 2)at the right time, 3)for the right reason. Even though it wasn't in your primary area.

Rocky, if MTD was overreacting, I think you may be under-reacting. You have enough experience to know that officiating isn't a free-for-all where officials just call anything they see on the court. Your first paragraph above may not be that "loose" but you sure aren't going out of your way to explain when and what to do. I say this to you because I know you know better.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

It's funny because the HS camps I've attended all say stay in your primary, etc.

The DI & NBA camps I've attended says referee your PCA while seeing as much of the court as possible. As a matter of fact, they want two sets of eyes on particular plays with congested action areas. You know there are front & back sides to some plays right?

When I had the HS mentality I couldn't get past the first week of HS post-season. Then I started following the higher level camps advice & became a State Tourney Official. Go figure

Why are you looking there anyway is so basic...
If you have an unengaged match-up (non-competitive for the HS mentality refs) do you just stay there watching those 2 or 4 people or go to the next layer of the play that can hurt you???

I'm not going to compare post-season success with you, but I disagree with how you are thinking. Yes, the NBA mentality is to have more than one set of eyes on certain plays, but that doesn't mean it is a free-for-all.

Originally Posted by Ch1town

It wasn't that I didn't like your answer. Actually I did what you said & let him live/die with those. But I felt quite bad when the defensive team in both instances came to me with "you know you saw that, help him out."

Are you using the opinions of players to validate your opinion/position?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Rocky, if MTD was overreacting, I think you may be under-reacting. You have enough experience to know that officiating isn't a free-for-all where officials just call anything they see on the court. Your first paragraph above may not be that "loose" but you sure aren't going out of your way to explain when and what to do. I say this to you because I know you know better.

I think you just made the exact same point that I was making!??!

Officiating isn't a free-for-all of calling all over the court. But fiasco never said it was...the "esteemed" members who then jumped all over him acted like he did advocate that "free-for-all" thinking and then went into the "you just try and do that in MY game and see what happens" crap.

When and what to do? Hmmmm...I have always held to the thinking that there are three types of fouls (based on severity and impact of the contact on the play). The fouls make you say:
1) That's a foul.
2) Oh my. That's a foul.
3) OH MY GOD!!! THAT'S A FOUL!!!

When I see a #1 happen outside my primary (and not necessarily on the ball either - I'm not sure why people are throwing around just ball-watching on this thread now), I will not call it. If it happens again, we will discuss it as a crew at the next opportunity - "Hey, did you guys see what 55 and 43 were doing? We comfortable with that?

When I see a #2 happen outside my primary, I might call it, but probably not. But we will definitely discuss it at the next opportunity. "Hey partner, what did you see on that play where..." No "lectures". Just wanting to know what was seen and make sure we are all on the same "page".

When I see a #3 happen anywhere on the court, I will call it. And I don't really care about my partner's ego at that point. If they want to discuss it later, we will.

[tomegun]

Rocky, that is a great way to look at things. I know there seemed to be some strong opinions before, but I knew you had the knowledge you just laid out. I hope all the officials who read what you wrote will think about it and ask you questions if they don't understand what you said.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Does everyone realize that the amount of training, local games, etc. can make 5 years the equivalent to 20? Raise your hand it you've ever known an official who thought they deserved assignments because of how long they have been on the board regardless of their skill level. Yep, I thought everyone would raise their hand on that one.

Rich, nothing against you because I don't know you. I just wanted to point that out.

I've seen this work both ways, too. Guys who have 4 years of experience go to a couple of camps and think they're God's gift to officiating. Then something happens on the court and pants are full of poop. I know from my experience in this and a few other sports when to grab a call and when to acknowledge that I may see it, but not *see* it. Reaching across the paint from C at the far post is an example that comes immediately to mind. Unless I am looking through and see something off the wall, I trust my partners saw the play and chose to call nothing.

I only threw the number out to counter-bloviate MTD's post. I'd be more than happy to put my game up against any other little-ole HS official, though. Or are confidence and ego the same thing?

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I only threw the number out to counter-bloviate MTD's post.

I bloviated on a counter once. But then I had to clean it up. YUK!

[tomegun]

Bloviate: to speak or write verbosely and windily. To bloviate means "to speak pompously and excessively" or "to expound ridiculously".

Thank you for using that word. I would have said, "I only threw the number out to counter the hot air MTD was blowing in his post."

Rich, you are 100% correct. Years don't necessarily indicate how good an official is. When I type something on this forum I often think about a young official reading it. Young(er) officials shouldn't think there is a magical amount of time served to get better games. Every official should attempt to give the assigner no other choice but to give them games. I've moved to several new associations and pissed a lot of people off because they thought I should be treated like a rookie official and they had X amount of years with the association. I don't feel for them one bit because every official has the opportunity to improve and make the assigner's job easier.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Rocky, that is a great way to look at things. I know there seemed to be some strong opinions before, but I knew you had the knowledge you just laid out. I hope all the officials who read what you wrote will think about it and ask you questions if they don't understand what you said.

I have a question.

Does the proposed 1,2,3 system work well in practice or just on paper, because each individual must have a different idea of what constitutes a foul/violation of each category.

Specifically, what if I think that a play is a 1, but tomegun sees it as a 2, while Rocky reacts to it as a 3? Or what if the primary official deems something a 1, but a partner deems it a 2 or 3? Again we are having the opinion/judgment of the non-primary official override that of the primary official, if we recommend that he put a whistle on the play. That's what I'm against. If the covering official can see the play and makes a decision, the system and principles of teamwork demand that that is what we go with.
I cannot support the way of thinking expressed on here by fiasco that an official doesn't have time to worry about why his partner didn't make a call and that he doesn't even consider that aspect of the play, but just calls what he believes to be right even though his partner has that area. I think that is poor. An official has to give his partner the benefit of the doubt and must go through an extra step of the thought process prior to calling out of his primary, and that extra step is to ask, "Can my partner see that?" One might conclude that he is screened or blocked out, but one might also think, "He's looking right at it." In that last case, blowing the whistle on anything other than a non-basketball play doesn't make sense.

In the end, I see the proposed three-category concept as merely a different way of expressing the same problem as the original travel scenario, only it tricks the reader into thinking that it makes more sense because he analyzes it from his viewpoint with his understanding of what is a 1, 2, or 3 in his mind, while not taking into account what a 1,2, or 3 is in his partner's opinion.

It seems to me that fiasco is considering the much discussed travel to be a category 3, while I'm thinking that it is only a 1. So he would go and get that, while I wouldn't.

I guess that it comes down to a person opinion of what is an important call to go get and what can be or should be left alone.

[tomegun]

First of all, if we are going to stick with the "categories", I'm not so sure I would consider any travel call a 3.

We can talk about when to make a call outside our primaries until we are blue in the face, but at the end of the day it boils down to how good the officials are. It takes some skill and judgement to know when to put air in the whistle and when to leave a play alone. It is the difference between looking/calling all over the floor and good crew officiating.

To those officials who want to get every play right, good luck. I say that because while you are looking to help all the time, someone could be getting slaughtered in your area and you will never know about it.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I guess that it comes down to a person opinion of what is an important call to go get and what can be or should be left alone.

Sure it does...and that is one of the things that separates officials. The really good ones figure out which calls they need to go get and which calls to leave alone. Without knowing fiasco, I would say that he is on the path to learning those things. Is a travel call one that really needs to be be "gotten"? Probably not, but I am sure there are some scenarios where it could happen.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

When and what to do? Hmmmm...I have always held to the thinking that there are three types of fouls (based on severity and impact of the contact on the play). The fouls make you say:
1) That's a foul.
2) Oh my. That's a foul.
3) OH MY GOD!!! THAT'S A FOUL!!!

This is also the way I was taught. And, on #3 to have a patient whistle.

My problem sometimes is in Rec Leagues I watch more of the floor due to my inexperienced partners and I have occasionally "stepped on it" when I get an experienced partner(s) during the HS season. I must do better here.

I also agree with the comments in this thread about years of experience vs quality officiating. Good points for the younger officials. I will be going on HS yr 4 coming up and while I am getting better games now, I still have a ways to go yet (IMO).....still work to be done!