Letting it get out of control

[jeffpea]

Originally Posted by stilllearning

I guess I would flip what you're saying and say that 1% of the time it could be the officials fault. My thought is that the quote your referring to is talking about fouls other than the stuff we would call t's. There was nothing in the game I was working that would have led you to believe that A1 would fall down, get frustrated and slap the girls leg. If a kid "decides" to act out with something they know will get them a tech then that's their fault. Kids know better and know that if they shove another player during a dead ball that it will be a tech. Even if they themselves had just got shoved they know that if they respond it will be called. The kids are responsible for their behavior. Not us. But I need to hear all this because I could be off base with my thinking and don't want to stay there if I am. That's part of why I posted as I'm still learning. What do you think? Respectfully submitted.

I totally agree that kids (heck, everyone) is responsible for their own behavior. In general, would you say that players react in frustration from only one play, or several plays over the course of the game? My answer is that frustration builds over time. Very, very infrequently will one play cause a player to "blow his top".

When contact occurs in a game that affects the play (and an advantage is gained) and a foul is not called, players assume that a penalty will not be enforced and continue that behavior/action later in the game. Physical play ultimately escalates into situtations that become a problem - hard fouls, intentional fouls, unsportsman-like plays, etc. It is usually a result of not blowing the whistle earlier in the game.

If officials blow the whistle and establish early what contact is a foul and what is not, then the players will adjust (or sit on the bench after fouling out). When officials are rather passive and let too much contact occur between players, that is when problems build and become a problem later in the game. That is when officials, by their lack of game control, create the circumstances that often lead to problems in games.

I hope you are reading this in the moderate tone that I intend to communicate. Too many times posts on this board are extrapolated to their extremes and viewed in a "black or white" perspective. I'm not advocating that passing on minor contact will lead to a fight in the 4th qtr., nor do I think that "the more fouls called in a game, the better"....I believe that, in general, officials could, and should, call more fouls than we do in games. It will make for a better game and will definitely lead to less problems (and phone calls from assignors) in the future.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

I totally agree that kids (heck, everyone) is responsible for their own behavior. In general, would you say that players react in frustration from only one play, or several plays over the course of the game? My answer is that frustration builds over time. Very, very infrequently will one play cause a player to "blow his top".

When contact occurs in a game that affects the play (and an advantage is gained) and a foul is not called, players assume that a penalty will not be enforced and continue that behavior/action later in the game. Physical play ultimately escalates into situtations that become a problem - hard fouls, intentional fouls, unsportsman-like plays, etc. It is usually a result of not blowing the whistle earlier in the game.

If officials blow the whistle and establish early what contact is a foul and what is not, then the players will adjust (or sit on the bench after fouling out). When officials are rather passive and let too much contact occur between players, that is when problems build and become a problem later in the game. That is when officials, by their lack of game control, create the circumstances that often lead to problems in games.

I hope you are reading this in the moderate tone that I intend to communicate. Too many times posts on this board are extrapolated to their extremes and viewed in a "black or white" perspective. I'm not advocating that passing on minor contact will lead to a fight in the 4th qtr., nor do I think that "the more fouls called in a game, the better"....I believe that, in general, officials could, and should, call more fouls than we do in games. It will make for a better game and will definitely lead to less problems (and phone calls from assignors) in the future.

I might be an "extrapolator" here but, for the sake of everyone, hear we would be safe to say that by "too much contact" you mean ILLEGAL contact, correct?? Cause I know in the leagues I work there is a lot of very physical contact and it is still legal. So to say "too much contact" would not be correct, but if I am reading too much into it I apologize. I just don't want people on here thinking that mere fact that there is a lot of contact that it should be a foul. Too much contact is not a foul, illegal contact is a foul.

WOW!!! Am I becoming the new Jurassic cause I just feel like this is something he would say?????? ha

[Rich]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

I totally agree that kids (heck, everyone) is responsible for their own behavior. In general, would you say that players react in frustration from only one play, or several plays over the course of the game? My answer is that frustration builds over time. Very, very infrequently will one play cause a player to "blow his top".

When contact occurs in a game that affects the play (and an advantage is gained) and a foul is not called, players assume that a penalty will not be enforced and continue that behavior/action later in the game. Physical play ultimately escalates into situtations that become a problem - hard fouls, intentional fouls, unsportsman-like plays, etc. It is usually a result of not blowing the whistle earlier in the game.

If officials blow the whistle and establish early what contact is a foul and what is not, then the players will adjust (or sit on the bench after fouling out). When officials are rather passive and let too much contact occur between players, that is when problems build and become a problem later in the game. That is when officials, by their lack of game control, create the circumstances that often lead to problems in games.

I hope you are reading this in the moderate tone that I intend to communicate. Too many times posts on this board are extrapolated to their extremes and viewed in a "black or white" perspective. I'm not advocating that passing on minor contact will lead to a fight in the 4th qtr., nor do I think that "the more fouls called in a game, the better"....I believe that, in general, officials could, and should, call more fouls than we do in games. It will make for a better game and will definitely lead to less problems (and phone calls from assignors) in the future.

Except this is something you've said many times and I just don't agree with you that it's some kind of serious problem.

It's the fans who think we need to "blow our whistles more," except when we do against their team and then we need to "let them play."

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

When contact occurs in a game that affects the play (and an advantage is gained) and a foul is not called, players assume that a penalty will not be enforced and continue that behavior/action later in the game.

The major problem with that philosophy imo is that an official and a player may have completely different views on the same play as to whether a foul had occurred. The player feels the contact and almost automatically thinks "foul". The official sees the contact, and if he is competent and experienced, he then judges whether that contact actually was illegal. Iow, you may have separate and disparate views as to whether an advantage was actually gained.

Officials are neutral; players and coaches aren't. And that's why the person with the whistle has to prevail, no matter what anyone else in the gym might think.

[Pantherdreams]

I hate it when I work with members of our association who think game management = call it tight + have a predetermined idea of how much I'm going to let go.

Fouls are not contact. They are an involved process dependant on the nature of the contact, the type of contact, player position, advantage gained or disadvantage caused and immediacy of the adv/disadv.

There is nothing worse then watching or officiating a game with two physical athletic teams play a game with 50 fouls called and it be determined by who's bench players are better free throw shooters. This isn't my thought process in the game, but each situation in a game is unique and really needs to be called as such.

This "keep the hands off", " quit your reaching", or my personal favorite "he's gotta learn not to do that" stuff makes me crazy. It its contact meeting criteria for a foul call it, if not zip and don't worry about what could happen in the future as a result of some teenagers response to what you did or did not call in the first half.

[btaylor64]

A lot has been said here so I would like to compile with some phrases I have heard and some other thoughts on this:

"Players will play as you allow them to play"- Having a "let 'em play attitude" in regards to passing on illegal contact for the sake of having flow in your game is unacceptable. If a player has illegal trajectory in the first 5 min., its the same as the last 5 min. Now that's not to say you are/were unsure of the player's trajectory, picked up the play late and didn't blow, etc. If you don't know you don't blow and that is fine, but not calling illegal contact just because it is early is wrong. I would suggest thinking about it like this.... imagine you are having every play charted and if you don't get 90% of your plays right you don't have a shot at a postseason assignment. I think this would help a little. I believe this would cause you to still call obvious fouls at all parts of the game. just a thought



"Marginal vs. Illegal"- In regards to the referees who think they should call it tight to keep the game from getting out of hand I would have to disagree as well, because by doing this you get into an already pre-conceived notion that you are looking for any little thing to call to "set" your own tone and I believe that to be over the top. By calling marginal contact a foul we have, in fact, said to the player's "almost any contact is a foul" and that is not good for the game, player's, coach's or fans.

My opinion is that, and in particular to the guys/gals who Crew Chief a lot of games, you tell your crew that you just go out there and distinguish between marginal and illegal contact, nothing else. Don't worry about flow and don't worry about having to call a lot of early fouls. You must still attack the game and be aggressive but if you stay away from marginal contact and call obvious fouls early that will be the tone of your game..... getting every play you can right. That's the tone you are looking to set. Nothing more or nothing less. I truly believe we attempt to make this too difficult and sometimes it does get difficult but not early in a game.

[Nevadaref]

It seems appropriate to offer this comment in this thread and let others chime in with their thoughts.

One of my colleagues whom I consider a mentor told me last year that one thing which separates the top-notch officials from the rest is that they aren't afraid to let a game get a little out of control. He then expounded upon that comment by explaining that the game of basketball is best when it is contested on the edge. The top officials have developed a good sense of what that point is and can let the players go right up to there without having problems. Of course, this can only be experienced by having the action cross the line a few times. That is when true game management is tested and the officials must be very sharp to bring it back quickly. In the end, he shared with me that certain officials will never make it to the top because they are simply afraid of having the game get beyond their control and so call it tighter than the players involved can handle. This displeases the competitors and they don't come away with the feeling that win or lose they were in a great battle.
In summary, what I took from his advice was that there is certainly an art to finding the right balance, and one must be willing to take the risk to get there, but once the game reaches that point if the official is strong enough to control it, it will be a fantastic contest.