First varsity boys game

[KJUmp]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Congrats, mbyron! Glad it went well...

+1.
Way to go!

[26 Year Gap]

Even more important than not mentioning to your partners about it being your first BV game is to not announce it at the captains & coaches meeting.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Even more important than not mentioning to your partners about it being your first BV game is to not announce it at the captains & coaches meeting.

I've always thought it would be entertaining to say this to the head coaches right before a game, acting really nervous, and see how the game goes.

I wouldn't do it, but I've thought about it.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by mbyron

I started doing varsity girls last year, and had my first varsity boys game last night. A couple notes:

1. I got a call from my primary assignor asking if I would take this game -- 1 h 40 minutes away! Game fee will cover approximately half of my mileage.

2. I think I did OK. I had two great partners and tried to match their game. I might have missed a minor travel and maybe a couple of other things, but I didn't have a "stinker" -- you know, the call that has everyone in the gym either screaming at you or scratching their heads asking "what the heck was that?" I made one or two calls as L on C's side of the lane, but they were double whistles. Still working on the different PCA's for 3-person.

3. Two smallish teams that play basically the same game. We had about 30 fouls in the first half, including a double T that partner called in the 1Q. It was right after a shooting foul where the shooter ended up on the floor. The fouler kinda stood over him in a threatening way (not quite taunting), and the shooter's teammate got up on the fouler's face. One coach said "isn't that a little quick?" Partner replied: "Should I have waited until they threw a punch?" Didn't have any further trouble that night.

4. Second half went much smoother. Oh yeah: to complete my initiation and to make sure I didn't get home quickly, we went to overtime (sorry Padgett).

I didn't tell my partners that it was my first varsity game until afterwards. Didn't want them to worry about me. It was good.

First and foremost, congrats! You are capable. Believe in yourself.

Question about the double T decision that your partner made: Did the fouler and the teammate exchange words or pushes? Was he penalizing them for offenses committed against each other? If not, and the fouler was T'd for standing over the shooter while the teammate was T'd for coming to the shooter's aid, then this should NOT have been a double T. It should have been a false double technical foul and the two teams each should have been awarded 2FTs in the order in which the fouls occurred.

PS Do you get paid mileage as well as a game fee?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

First and foremost, congrats! You are capable. Believe in yourself.

Question about the double T decision that your partner made: Did the fouler and the teammate exchange words or pushes? Was he penalizing them for offenses committed against each other? If not, and the fouler was T'd for standing over the shooter while the teammate was T'd for coming to the shooter's aid, then this should NOT have been a double T. It should have been a false double technical foul and the two teams each should have been awarded 2FTs in the order in which the fouls occurred.

PS Do you get paid mileage as well as a game fee?

First and foremost, thanks!

I understand your point about the double T. I did not quite see what either player did. From what the R told me, they "got in each others' faces." From that description, it sounds like the right call.

And no, we don't get mileage. Ordinarily I drive no farther than 35 miles for a game, so 90 was unusual to say the least.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Question about the double T decision that your partner made: Did the fouler and the teammate exchange words or pushes? Was he penalizing them for offenses committed against each other? If not, and the fouler was T'd for standing over the shooter while the teammate was T'd for coming to the shooter's aid, then this should NOT have been a double T. It should have been a false double technical foul and the two teams each should have been awarded 2FTs in the order in which the fouls occurred.

I respectfully beg to differ, Mr. CumquatHead.

Were the techical fouls committed by opponents? Check!!
Did the technical fouls occur at approximately the same time? Check!!
Did the opponents not commit the technical fouls against each other? Check!!(only one of the "T"s was against each other, not both)

Sure sounds to me like it meets the definition of a simultaneous technical foul as per rule 4-19-10.

And there is also nowayinhell it can only be a false double technical foul. Did you forget the original personal foul on the shooter? It's a false double foul comprised of the original personal foul on the shooter followed by the simultaneous technical fouls.

And how do you administer this, you ask? There's no FT's for a simultaneous technical foul and you go to the POI as per rule 10-6PENALTIES SUMMARY 1(d). And in this case the POI is the first FT for the personal foul committed on the shooter as per rule 4-36-2(b). And you shoot the FT's with the players on the lane lines.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I respectfully beg to differ, Mr. CumquatHead.

Were the techical fouls committed by opponents? Check!!
Did the technical fouls occur at approximately the same time? Check!!
Did the opponents not commit the technical fouls against each other? Check!!(only one of the "T"s was against each other, not both)

Sure sounds to me like it meets the definition of a simultaneous technical foul as per rule 4-19-10.

And there is also nowayinhell it can only be a false double technical foul. Did you forget the original personal foul on the shooter? It's a false double foul comprised of the original personal foul on the shooter followed by the simultaneous technical fouls.

And how do you administer this, you ask? There's no FT's for a simultaneous technical foul and you go to the POI as per rule 10-6PENALTIES SUMMARY 1(d). And in this case the POI is the first FT for the personal foul committed on the shooter as per rule 4-36-2(b). And you shoot the FT's with the players on the lane lines.

Perhaps simultaneous Ts would be appropriate here. It lies in the eye of the beholder. However, if I see a player foul his opponent and then stand over him in a menacing manner, then one of his teammates rushes to his aid and gets in that guy's face, I'm taking those actions in sequence as they very clearly follow one another as cause and effect.

I'll stick with my opinion of the false double Ts, which of course are to be administered after the FTs for the original foul. I didn't forget about that either. I merely went forward with the administration of the Ts in my writing instead of going back and specifying that part as well. I thought that it would be clear from the context.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Perhaps simultaneous Ts would be appropriate here. It lies in the eye of the beholder.

Can't argue too much with that. Judgment call.

Personally, if the actions are related to each other and the time frame is close, I lump 'em together.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Can't argue too much with that. Judgment call.

Personally, if the actions are related to each other and the time frame is close, I lump 'em together.

Sure simplifies things and saves administering a bunch of FTs!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Sure simplifies things and saves administering a bunch of FTs!

That's exactly why I recommend it, as long as it can be justified rules-wise.