Running out of Bounds

[cmar]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I've seen it called once, right after it became a violation instead of a technical foul. During a two person game, like most games here in the "Land of Steady Habits", while I was the lead, an offensive player ran out of bounds, and almost ran into me to go around a screen, and went back in bounds on the other side of the lane. He didn't get the ball that time down, but I said to myself, if he does it again, I'm calling the violation. Down at the other end, a foul was called and my partner and I switched. The next time back down to the other end of the court, I'm the trail, and I hear my partner's whistle. He called the violation on the player for going out of bounds to go around the screen, the same play that I had seen a few minutes earlier. We hadn't even talked about it. He just called it on his own. Good call, but it took some explaining to the coach for him to understand what his player had done wrong.

if you don't mind, i'd like to ask how you explained it to him. because, what's running through my mind (as i'm trying to place myself in your shoes, and the coaches shoes), is how do you explain that call to the coach, when it wasn't called the previous possesion? as an official i understand a rule is a rule, and i've had those sequences where i catch a player doing something and say to myself "if he does that again, i'm calling it." i understand a rule is a rule, and that's really the end of it from the coaches perspective, but i can't imagine he was very happy about his player doing something, not getting called, then doing it the next posession and getting called for it. do you just say that you missed the first violation, or what?
i just want to know for my own future reference if i ever get caught in something like that.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by cmar

if you don't mind, i'd like to ask how you explained it to him. because, what's running through my mind (as i'm trying to place myself in your shoes, and the coaches shoes), is how do you explain that call to the coach, when it wasn't called the previous possesion? as an official i understand a rule is a rule, and i've had those sequences where i catch a player doing something and say to myself "if he does that again, i'm calling it." i understand a rule is a rule, and that's really the end of it from the coaches perspective, but i can't imagine he was very happy about his player doing something, not getting called, then doing it the next posession and getting called for it. do you just say that you missed the first violation, or what?
i just want to know for my own future reference if i ever get caught in something like that.

One really cannot/should not/should not be expected to explain everything that one doesn't call.

This makes a coach unhappy?

He should be happy that he got away with it the first time.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by cmar

if you don't mind, i'd like to ask how you explained it to him. because, what's running through my mind (as i'm trying to place myself in your shoes, and the coaches shoes), is how do you explain that call to the coach, when it wasn't called the previous possesion? as an official i understand a rule is a rule, and i've had those sequences where i catch a player doing something and say to myself "if he does that again, i'm calling it." i understand a rule is a rule, and that's really the end of it from the coaches perspective, but i can't imagine he was very happy about his player doing something, not getting called, then doing it the next posession and getting called for it. do you just say that you missed the first violation, or what?
i just want to know for my own future reference if i ever get caught in something like that.

I'd be more worried about calling the violation on one end, then missing it on the other. Try explaining that.