To reach or not reach

[Hugh Refner]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Really? The only time I let anything go is a) if it's out of my area and I'm not 100% sure of the call or b) it's blatantly out of my area and/or sightline and there's no reason I should be looking there in the first place, because I'm gonna get a rash of crap from a coach as to why I'm not paying attention to my primary and I won't be able to give him a good reason.

I agree with A and also agree with B except the part about the reason for not looking there is because of fear of what some coach might say. That's never a part of my decision making process.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

I agree with A and also agree with B except the part about the reason for not looking there is because of fear of what some coach might say. That's never a part of my decision making process.

Right, for me, the process of breaking myself of the horrible ball watching habit has been learning not to call what I see when it's in front of my partner. I have made too many phantom travel calls from 35 feet away.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Yes, we want to get the call correct. BUT, remember: 1) Stay true to your boundary lines; 2) Officiate your primary; and 3) TRUST your partner(s).


Yes, there are times when an official should extend his primary but 99.999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 ,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,9 99,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 ,999,999,999,999,999...% of the time it should be off ball coverage in the same area that your partner has on ball coverage.


AND, DO NOT be a ball watcher.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. I delveloped a great training aid for officials who want to watch the ball and make calls on the ball out of their primary. It involves electrodes and a heavy duty marine battery, .

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

99.999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 ,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,9 99,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999,999 ,999,999,999,999,999%

Wow. That's higher than Ivory soap, 99 44/100 %.

[Raymond]

I would really, really love for Tomegun to chime in on this topic.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Wow. That's higher than Ivory soap, 99 44/100 %.

Billy:

Ivory Soap isn't the only thing that floats, .

MTD, Sr.

[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.

[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.

[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.

[TheOracle]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

I learned long ago that the pyramid starts with 1)Protect the integrity of the game.

Pure gold right there.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

I agree with A and also agree with B except the part about the reason for not looking there is because of fear of what some coach might say. That's never a part of my decision making process.

It has nothing to do with fear. It has to do with the coach being right.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by fiasco

It has nothing to do with fear. It has to do with the coach being right.

Uh-oh. One game suspension for using the words "coach", "being" and "right" in the same sentence.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Uh-oh. One game suspension for using the words "coach", "being" and "right" in the same sentence.

To each his/her own. I prefer to operate in the real world, where officials make mistakes and where coaches are *GASP* sometimes right.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by fiasco

To each his/her own. I prefer to operate in the real world, where officials make mistakes and where coaches are *GASP* sometimes right.

Yea, and you probably let games go into overtime, too!