Tough situation my partner put us in

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

From the original OP: "As soon as the ball bounces in the backcourt, my partner blows his whistle and calls an over and back violation on White.There's not a White team player within 10 feet of the ball. When I go over and ask what he's doing, he has the deer in the headlights look. He realizes he's kicked it, but now what do we do? Do we give it to White since they were the team in control, even though they could not have touched the ball without violating? What would you do?"


Why do we automatically assume that by rule we have an accidental or inadvertant whistle? Sounds like we just have a really, really bad call. The partner, who BTW was trail and thus it was his call to make (or in this case, blow) called a violation...he got it wrong, but he called a violation nonetheless. What if A1 were standing holding the ball and partner whistled him for a traveling violation? Would you rule an accidental or inadvertant whistle just because he made an incredibly bad travel violation call? What if partner called a foul and you and everyone else in the gym saw that the "fouler" was at least 5 feet away from the fouled player and there was absolutely, positively no way there was a foul? Would you assume an accidental or inadvertant whistle and step in and call it such because your partner is an idiot? Would you intervene on every "bad" call you determine your partner made by using the accidental or inadvertant whistle defense? And don't tell me you've never said to yourself after a horrible call by a partner, "Self, dude just made a horrible call!" and then proceeded to enforce his crappy call. Seems in this OP our crew would just have to live with this particularly horrible call. He (and probably me since he seems pretty clueless) explain it to the Blue coach, give the ball to Blue OOB, and we move on. Afterward, partner and I, along with the camp staff, have a long discussion on how to officiate.

And please note, I'm not disputing the great and accurate discussions on how to correctly administer an accidental or inadvertant whistle. And I'm not taking the chickensh!t route by hiding behind "not-wanting-to-follow-the-rules-just-so-we-can-do-the-easy/right-thing-by-the-Blue-team-and-avoid-personal-pain-and-responsibility-in-the-process" that so many of you will automatically accuse me of...there's going to be pain regardless, anyway. I'm just not automatically assuming this is an accidental or inadvertant whistle.

Heard something similar........oh, yeah.

Originally Posted by just another ref

He called a violation. No matter how wrong this call is, it would not be as wrong as giving the ball back to white.

I agree with your take, and if I understood correctly, Camron does also.

But that seems to be all of us.

[wanja]

Originally Posted by just another ref

He called a violation. No matter how wrong this call is, it would not be as wrong as giving the ball back to white.

Originally Posted by just another ref

Heard something similar........oh, yeah.


I agree with your take, and if I understood correctly, Camron does also.

But that seems to be all of us.

Include me also.

Originally Posted by wanja

The outcome is correct by common sense and justifiable by rule. This was not an inadvertant whistle and should not be treated as such. Your partner erroneously called a backcourt violation and should live with the call. He should award the ball to blue and play on.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

The partner, who BTW was trail and thus it was his call to make (or in this case, blow) called a violation...he got it wrong, but he called a violation nonetheless.

I asked jar this question, and never got a response. I'll ask you too: What is your definition of an indavertant/accidental whistle, in the context of the rules? Surely it's a little more than the official sneezing and the whistle blowing as a result? What about the case play Nevada posted about the official being sure there was a TO request, but got it wrong and called the TO nonetheless? How does the committee consider that an accidental whistle, but the OP's play is not?

If this whole issue is about overruling a partner's call, remember the OP said:

Originally Posted by Smitty

When I go over and ask what he's doing, he has the deer in the headlights look. He realizes he's kicked it, but now what do we do?

The original question was about the official who made the call realized they blew it and made a call they should not have, so what does the crew do now? It has never been about correcting a partner's wrong call.

[just another ref]

Accidental whistle: whistle blown/call made mistakenly which produces an undesirable result

Not the case here.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Accidental whistle: whistle blown/call made mistakenly which produces an undesirable result

Not the case here.

Why not?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Why not?

The team wound up with the ball which would have wound up with the ball anyway had the call not been made.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The team wound up with the ball which would have wound up with the ball anyway had the call not been made.

Do you have a rule or case to back that up?

That's a rhetorical question, because obviously there isn't one. You've been shown the specific rules and case plays backing up giving back to the team last in control, not the team that "should've gotten it".

You want to make a call directly contradicting the rules because you think it's "more fair", and people may not complain as much. I get that, and I used to think that way a long time ago. Most of the time you might get away with it. But if you work this game long enough, there will be that one time that someone will discover you are making calls not based on a lack of rules knowledge, but rather by making up rules, and that will hurt your advancement possibilities.

I've learned it is always better to stick with the rules, no matter how much complaining happens as a result.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Accidental whistle: whistle blown/call made mistakenly which produces an undesirable result

So if the result is "desirable", then the whistle isn't accidental?

Who decides whether the result is "desirable?"

[gslefeb]

If an official blows the whistle to call backcourt; Then realizes it was the incorrect call, don't you get an inadvertant whistles ... ooops my bad - do over... using POI ?

In the case mentioned... If the score was not mentioned - would it have change the responses? Or if White was losing by a bunch?

If the official above - did not "reverse" the call; then we have a backcourt violation and Blue Basketball.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by gslefeb

If an official blows the whistle to call backcourt; Then realizes it was the incorrect call, don't you get an inadvertant whistles ... ooops my bad - do over... using POI ?

Yep, that's the gist of the entire thread.

Originally Posted by gslefeb

In the case mentioned... If the score was not mentioned - would it have change the responses? Or if White was losing by a bunch?

Would you change how you call the game in other areas based on the score? Would you make or not make certain travel calls based on the score? Would you start calling fouls on one end and stop calling fouls on the other end, based on the score?

The answer to these questions should be the same as the answer to your question.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

So if the result is "desirable", then the whistle isn't accidental?

In a nutshell, correct.

Who decides whether the result is "desirable?"

The official who made the call, with the assistance of his partner, if necessary.

[Corndog89]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I asked jar this question, and never got a response. I'll ask you too: What is your definition of an indavertant/accidental whistle, in the context of the rules? Surely it's a little more than the official sneezing and the whistle blowing as a result? What about the case play Nevada posted about the official being sure there was a TO request, but got it wrong and called the TO nonetheless? How does the committee consider that an accidental whistle, but the OP's play is not?

If this whole issue is about overruling a partner's call, remember the OP said:

The original question was about the official who made the call realized they blew it and made a call they should not have, so what does the crew do now? It has never been about correcting a partner's wrong call.

Just like the NFHS, I don't have a definition for an inadvertant/accidental whistle. And if I have to start defining the rules in the middle of a game, then the rules makers have done us all a disservice. Do you have a precise definition and exhaustive list of what is/is not an inadvertant/accidental whistle? If so, I'd love to see it. Maybe it's like the old description of pornography...I can't define it but I know it when I see it.

As for Nevada's post, it seems perfectly reasonable to me that a mis-communication on a TO request between an official and a coach could/should be an inadvertant/accidental whistle. But the fact that NFHS has to identify "some" quirky situations in which an inadvertant/accidental whistle would be the correct call just confirms the point that you would only make such a call if there was no specific rule application to make. In the OP there is a rule application...badly applied, but a rule applied nonetheless. And you can't (or so it seems to me) get into the habit of correcting every badly applied rule with an inadvertant/accidental whistle crutch.

But my original concern was the statement made very early in this thread that "by rule" we have an inadvertant/accidental whistle. How can there be such a thing when there is no specific inadvertant/accidental whistle rule in the rule book, only some applications to exceptional situations in the case book?

To me the OP is a case where partner (and probably I) have to suck it up and explain what he did to the coaches and move forward. Like none of us has ever blown a call before...bet partner owns that rule forever forward.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Corndog89

Just like the NFHS, I don't have a definition for an inadvertant/accidental whistle.

But I did supply the NCAA definition, which also fits the various NFHS case plays: "An inadvertent whistle occurs any time an official blows the whistle as an oversight and does not have a call to make." It's a pretty easy transition. Yes, I know there are many differences between NCAA and NFHS, but in this area (POI and accidental/inadvertant whistles), the codes are alike.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Yes, I know there are many differences between NCAA and NFHS, but in this area (POI and accidental/inadvertant whistles), the codes are alike.

Just as is the habitual motion preceeding a try, but that's another story