Here is the situation.
I am calling my normal game fairly tight but still keeping in mind Advantage/disadvantage and play starts to get rough. I am calling more fouls but play continues to be rough.
Do you then begin to call all contact regardless of Ad/Disad?

MOFFICIAL,

Man, I hate it when games get like that. Sometimes the philosophy of "call the game and the players will adjust" just doesn't apply. Well, I guess it does apply, because if they don't adjust they will be sitting down. However, I really don't like to "change" the way a game is being called. Let the game itself dictate the flow. You may find yourself making more calls at certain times, but I like to let the players decide that.

If the play in the post is rough I may call two or three off-ball fouls to get them to lighten up. If they are holding or bumping the guards off the ball I will make sure that I make that call so that they know I'm watching the off-ball stuff too. Then if there are the players that are trouble makers and are just causing problems. The best advise I can recommend is that they can't hurt you when they are on the bench. ;)

Do not like the terminology personally.
 

I personally do not believe in the term "tight" or "loose" when you talk about what you call. It is always in my book going to be about advantage/disadvantage for me. I think personally when you start talking with that kind of language, you begin to call contact that does not affect plays. Or you do not contact that needed to be called. I think what you call is not really how you stop behavior alone. You can talk to players and take your time after hard fouls. Better yet, use the FT shooting opportunities to get a point across and Throw-in situations.

I guess I am always going to call the game according to some kind of advantage/disadvantage principle. For those that are a stickler for the rulebook, that is how the rules require us to call it. I just think we personally need to do more off-ball officiating or dead ball officiating and that will help any situation much better than what you call. But that is just me.

Peace

MOFFICIAL,
If I get a chance during a free throw, I'll tell the players on the lane, "Clean it up. We don't wanna be callin' that cheap stuff, ... but we know how."
But don't let the Coaches hear you, or they'll start tellin' you to "Just call it", or they'll say, "Let'em play."
Generally, I like to warn before I start going after that off-ball stuff that I don't like to call without A/D.
mick

MOfficial, I believe you have to adjust for certain types of games. You cannot referee every game the same way at every point in the game. If a game is going smooth and sailing along and you have a borderline off ball foul or handcheck you can pass. However, if the game is getting rough and out of hand then you need to call borderline calls, especially of the off ball variety and rebounding fouls even if there is no advantage/disadvantage. These type of calls are good to reel the players back in and then hopefully they will adjust and the game will get cleaner, but sometimes you just have to keep blowing and have that "**** em" attitude.

MOfficial,

Advantage/Disadvantage works 95% of the time. But we have to be good enough officials to adjust to the game at hand and tighten up even more at times. If the players won't adjust, we may have to. There are times when we have to "tighten up" and it sounds like this is one of them.

Knowing when to do this is an art and separates some officials from others who can't recognize the situation. Even NBA officials do this on occasion. I had a couple games like that last year...my partner and I got together and said, "this game is getting too rough so let's clean it up before it gets worse." For the next couple of minutes, almost all contact became a foul rather than the ones that affected plays. I hated to do it, but it was necessary and solved the problem. Great game from then on. Preventative officiating in a way....prevented some garbage we wouldn't want to see later.

Z

Eli is right. Sometimes the game will allow you to pass, but oftentimes it won't. If the players don't respond, you have to keep calling the same way. I always tell my partners that "a team's style will not dictate how we call the game."

Had a V game last year with 80 fouls called and 91 FTs shot. It was ugly, but the kids didn't want to play so we called it accordingly. I felt terrible about the game because it was so ugly. My feelings changed when I worked with the same guy again and he told me that the local paper's article about the game included an interview with the coaches and their feeling were that we had called a lot of fouls, but that was how the game was played and we had to call them.

Sometimes you just have to call a lot.

[Edited by stripes on Aug 1st, 2002 at 10:36 AM]

I did a fair amount of varsity ball in June, and what I saw was that, if they play rougher, you call more, but you don't move the line for what you would have called. Let's see, can I say that more clearly? You are still calling by advantage/disadvantage, but that means more calls, becuase they are playing "more aggressively". If they object, you say, "Well, you have really stepped up the defense and you're making too much contact." In otherwords, it's their problem.
You don't have to "crack down" if they are getting more physical, although you may need to be calling more fouls.

<i>You don't have to "crack down" if they are getting more physical, although you may need to be calling more fouls.</i>

I'm confused. Isn't calling more fouls cracking down? If you're calling more fouls than you would have in a less physical game, haven't you moved the line of adv/dis? I agree you have to call more, but it sounds like you are saying you call more without adjusting. That isn't possible is it?

Z

No, I don't think that's cracking down. If I understand what she's trying to say, you are calling fouls the exact same way - i.e. same contact, same ad/Dis = same call - the players are just creating more situations that require your expertise in evaluation and puttin air in the Fox40

<i>No, I don't think that's cracking down. </I>

OK, I'll buy that. But in the original question, the referee did start calling more and the game was still too rough. So wouldn't you adjust in that case?

Z

I take a 3-prong attack on this.

Game management – Talk it up. “Slow down.” “Watch the pushing.” “Was that a smart foul?”

Game Control – Start calling the nit-pick violations. The slight movement of the pivot foot. The hand at 4 o’clock on the ball (carrying because the palm is facing the ceiling). Foot breaking the vertical of the line. Etc. All this slows the game down. Gives the players time to gather their composure.

Player/coach control - Call it tight but call it fair. When making your report to the table, make eye contact with the coach. Hopefully he will get the idea. Don’t be afraid to call intentional or even a flagrant foul if there is the slightest bit of suspicion in your mind. I justify this as a safety issue.

An HM's 2 cents worth: Call a game consistently from the beginning - if you let a ticky-tack foul go in the 1st half, let it go in the 2nd. The reverse is true. If you don't, you look inconsistent - the worst thing a ref can do in my eyes. You know the complaint: "Hey, you weren't calling that in the first half. Why are you calling it now?"

I may be way off base (not unusual), but a game probably doesn't get rougher if the referee exerts good, consistent game management from the beginning. Think of it this way: its a lot easier to stick your finger in a leaky dam than it is to put sandbags up after the dam breaks.

I don't think you're way off base, but I do think that there are times when we as officials (I can't speak for coaches) realize that the game has started to get away from us. Not through inconsistency, but due to frustration on the part of one team, or due to the lower skill level of the subs that have come in, or whatever. Maybe the intensity level has gone up in the second half and the teams are a little chippier.

Maybe at those times, it doesn't hurt to call a couple quick fouls that maybe weren't fouls in the first half; just to give everybody a chance to slow down. Just my opinion.

chuck

I agree wholeheartedly. For example, the beginning of the second half has the potential to show us how the teams have changed/adjusted to the results of the first half. These changes and adjustments could have the potential to let the game get away from us forcing and adjustment on our part. my $.02

Agree with Stripes
 

Sometimes, you'll get an ugly game that can't be helped.

Keep blowin' those fouls...nothing makes a crew look bad than bodies on the floor or unchecked rough-play.

In my experience, some kids don't play honest defense until they have 4 fouls...

Re: Agree with Stripes
 

So you were the guy who was always reffing my HS games! :D

Mike (hey that was 101st post! Wooo hooo!)

Hey, Chuck.

Coaches know when the game is getting away from us - that's when we start blaming the refs!

Just a thought. Early in the game, if both post players are going at it, this might be a good time for a double foul. That usually sends a good message. Some supervisors don't like double fouls, but others think there are good times to use them.

double fouls
 

Todd:

I don't disagree with the philopsophy, but I'd caution against having a double fouls too early in the game. I don't think the players will adjust with only 1 foul on them, and the coach may think you're overreacting early in the game.

I'll try to talk to the players first. If it's obvious to me that two players want to be tuff guys and rough house each other rather than play ball, I'll ring up the defensive player, tell them BOTH "to clean it up" or that "you'll get the same call on that side" (just once, but directly). If they don't adjust, then be quick to catch the other guy/gal on the other side.

They'll get the message sooner or later. If not, then a double foul is less likely to require an explaination("coach, i told them to clean it up")

...sometimes it takes 3 fouls to get them to play honest defense.

Re: double fouls
 

Why would you pick on one player,and let the other player get away with a similar act on the same play?:confused:Hardly seems fair to me!

Re: Re: double fouls
 

I should have clarified that I'm thinking primarily about post play, where most of the rough housing starts.

I beleive that in ALMOST all double foul situations, one one foul occurs before the other. The problem is:
1) either we missed the first one; OR
2) we actually saw it, but didn't think it merited a call. It's not until the 2nd player reacts that we are forced(?) to call the DF.

I'm calling it on the defense because, all other things being equal, I beleive it is imcumbent on the defense to maintain legal guarding position. If I didn't have an offense foul, then why should I have a double foul?

But you'd be sure I'll have a quick one on the other side of the same nature.

Remember, these two players don't want to play ball, they would rather fight for position with their 6 foot, 150 lb bodies banging together like two love-sick, cross-eyed giraffes. ;)

Pizanno,I really can't agree with you on that one.If two fouls are committed on the same play,I think you should either call 'em both,or ignore 'em and talk to both players.I personally don't like the idea of picking one player out and letting the other player get away with basically the same act.The same type of double-foul might not happen at the other end-and thus the offensive team has come out of this situation with an advantage that they don't really deserve.JMO.

My preference is to call a foul each one as they are on defense. A5 gets a foul. When we are next on the other end, I make sure the b5 gets one when they do the same thing. Then have a word with them that you'll keep calling that way if they keep banging that way.

My preference is to call a foul each one as they are on defense. A5 gets a foul. When we are next on the other end, I make sure the b5 gets one when they do the same thing. Then have a word with them that you'll keep calling that way if they keep banging that way. [/B][/QUOTE]Camron,do you call it first on the player who initiated the contact,or the player that responded to the contact?Or always on the offensive player first?Or do you just pick one of them out?It's a little hard to tell from your post.Just wondering.

Cameron understands the sitch....it's worked for me, as well.

JR: Beleive me, I called my share of DFs (even a false multiple!). I do agree that it's a judgement call.

Here's a very common sitch regarding rough play that is what I think the thread was addressing:

A5 & B5 are post players that won't be seeing the ball alot because both teams are run & gun and outside shooting-minded. They are mainly in there as rebounders and bangers.

On the first two possesions, each time shot is taken, they crash the boards, locking each other's arms together fighting for rebounding position. But since the ball either goes in, or hasn't come to them, you haven't made a call as there has been no advantage gained. Neither A5 or B5 has fallen on the floor, or even shown any negative emotion.

There have been no whistles and you haven't had an opportunity to talk to the players.

On the third possesion, a shot goes up, A5 & B5 lock each other up again, and the ball is coming to them. They both have equal position and equal chance at the ball. Now they fall.

On whom do you call the foul on? Double foul?

If DF, and they don't adjust, what is your next call going to be? Another DF?

...just another pebble on the basketball of life!

Pizano,if it works for you and Camron,I certainly ain't gonna knock either of you for handling it that way.I just personally feel more comfortable handling it the other way.As long as the game is kept under control and nobody ends up getting an advantage,I guess it doesn't really matter how you get there.

I'm voting with JR on this one. I have no problem calling a
double foul, even in the first minute, it it's warranted.
Yes, I'll probably try & talk them out of it first, but I
really don't like this "one for you up here, one for you down there" type of thing. The double foul is quick,
painless and gets your point across, and you don't have to
go looking for something to even it up on the other end.