Attacking ref: "Part of the game"

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

There may or may not have been areas in this play for the trail to improve his positioning, but no one is saying you should always have 2 officials watching 3 players in the backcourt. In fact, they are saying the C should stay and watch the play as he transitions to the frontcourt. IOW, hang back and make sure the T doesn't miss anything.

The T is stacked for a second or two, but it's an unfortunately timed second.

But, to bring it up in this context comes across as implying that you think the T could have somehow prevented all this. By what? Making the same call the C made, only a split second sooner? I don't think you were trying to imply that, but the inference isn't difficult to make.

So you are speaking for "they" now? I have a few questions for you:

Is it normal for 2 officials to watch 3 players come up the court without pressure or not?
What keys (rules of thumb or whatever) should the C use to transition up the court?
Should the Trail take a straight path up the court regardless of where players are?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tomegun

So you are speaking for "they" now? I have a few questions for you:

Is it normal for 2 officials to watch 3 players come up the court without pressure or not?
What keys (rules of thumb or whatever) should the C use to transition up the court?
Should the Trail take a straight path up the court regardless of where players are?

Serious answer?

No, it's not normal. But it is normal for the C to step down on the free throw, hang a second, and take a look at the matchups before heading to the frontcourt to officiate the other seven players since it takes a few seconds for those players to get down there and even contemplate trouble. And in this situation, seeing the jousting going on in the backcourt, I'm doing exactly what the C did there -- hanging back and keeping an eye on those players. The C's mechanics here, IMO, are impeccable.

Without the immediate jousting and shoving? I'm heading downcourt where the rest of the players are.

It's easy to blame the T for not being involved in this process, but it could simply be a quicker whistle by the C, who didn't have a ball matchup to worry about as well. Since I still work a fair amount of 2-person, I won't absolve the T -- in a 2-person game, he'd better get that.

[Rich]

To add to this:

I take back what I said about the mechanics being impeccable -- the C should've had the previous foul that set up the free throws -- instead the L called across the lane. It seems that the C was standing in quicksand there instead of stepping down a few steps to pick up that baseline drive. It didn't appear that the L even closed down or even contemplated rotating there. It seemed there was enough time for the L to rotate if he was ready to do so. Instead he seemed to be planted in one spot.

Also, the positioning of the C on the free throws should've been further on the court (there's no way he can step down and see a violation across the lane on the sideline).

That said, I have no problem with the C holding on a second and assessing the backcourt situation before heading downcourt. No comment on the trail, but it did seem as though he did a lot of standing around when that first whistle blew. I would've liked to have seen some aggressive closing down on that shoving match from more than just the C.

Regardless, there's no blame to be put on the officials here. The officials didn't assault themselves. And the calls made by the C were certainly correct, including the technical and ejection that preceded the assault.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Regardless, there's no blame to be put on the officials here. The officials didn't assault themselves. And the calls made by the C were certainly correct, including the technical and ejection that preceded the assault.

I agree with you on this. I was just pointing out some other things I noticed in this video. I knew how some would receive what I typed - even what you just said may be considered wrong by some since your opinion isn't saying that the official did everything right.

[bbcoach7]

Way too mechanical and in depth for me, quite sure someone may be over-complicating the krap outa this in an egocentric attempt to win an argument.

You guys know as well or better than me, these physical skirmishes tend to begin much earlier than when they explode. Players start jawing, getting "chippy," maybe a little extra hands on or pushing that is borderline incidental or intent. My point is that probably there was a good reason that the C had eyes exclusively on the three close to the T. Plus, did he? Looks to me like the back of the C's head is facing the camera

JR, nobody can tell where the C's eyes are! I suppose you can guess where he's looking by the direction of his head, but then you say things like, "never took his eyes off...," and you don't know that. Your argument is in part based on an assumption you can't prove. Eye balls can and do move side to side within their sockets! It's just as reasonable to speculate that the C just quickly scanned to his right and noticed that there was space between the 7 who just ran past him, then moved his eye balls back to the left, observed the activity and "TWEEET!" Because he was anticipating it. Because it really began 5 possessions earlier.

Finally JR, you make a big deal outa the L having to observe 7 players if the C is watching the ball. Correct mechanics for a 3 man crew aside, if this was a 2 man crew, wouldn't the L be watching 7 players? Isn't it something you've done a gazzilion times?

Then there's the stacked question. I seriously don't believe that a referee has to be 100% in line and stacked on an exact straight line in order to have his vision blocked. Just being close to on exact straight line may be enough to obscure a players arms even though most of the torso is visible, and the arms are what does the pushing.

As a coach, whether I was the HC or the VC, I'd just be pleased that it was whistled no matter who did it. Don't care and really does not matter. I also believe there's no way that the T doesn't tweet if he has vision of the initial pushing, indicating 100% stacked or not, he couldn't see it. That's a way more reasonable assumption than to think you know where the C's eyes are looking.

Sheesh

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bbcoach7

1) JR, nobody can tell where the C's eyes are! I suppose you can guess where he's looking by the direction of his head, but then you say things like, "never took his eyes off...," and you don't know that. Your argument is in part based on an assumption you can't prove. Eye balls can and do move side to side within their sockets! It's just as reasonable to speculate that the C just quickly scanned to his right and noticed that there was space between the 7 who just ran past him, then moved his eye balls back to the left, observed the activity and "TWEEET!" Because he was anticipating it. Because it really began 5 possessions earlier.

2) Finally JR, you make a big deal outa the L having to observe 7 players if the C is watching the ball. Correct mechanics for a 3 man crew aside, if this was a 2 man crew, wouldn't the L be watching 7 players? Isn't it something you've done a gazzilion times?

3) Then there's the stacked question. I seriously don't believe that a referee has to be 100% in line and stacked on an exact straight line in order to have his vision blocked. Just being close to on exact straight line may be enough to obscure a players arms even though most of the torso is visible, and the arms are what does the pushing.

Whatintheheck are you talking about?

1) The bottom line is that the C's eyes were on the initial contact. He made the foul call. Obviously he saw what was happening. What do I care about eyeballs? I try to go by exactly what happened. See the foul; call the foul. It's that simple. Coach, I'm honestly not sure what point you're trying to make here, but I do agree that the C certainly may have looked off the play first to check out possible contact from the other players as they were transitioning through his area before going back to the throw-in. But overall really, that's meaningless.

2) Now you really have me confused. Afaik I've haven't posted anything so far in this thread that had anything to do with the Lead or coverage of the other 7 players. I can't find anywhere where I've even referenced them. Can you point me to where you think I did that?

3) We agree.

Are you sure you aren't confusing me with Tomegun () and maybe a post of his like #42?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Regardless, there's no blame to be put on the officials here. The officials didn't assault themselves. And the calls made by the C were certainly correct, including the technical and ejection that preceded the assault.

My point from the git-go.

[Larks]

Hold up...were debating mechanics relative to this situation?? Really?!?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Larks

Hold up...were debating mechanics relative to this situation?? Really?!?

Thank you

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tomegun

So you are speaking for "they" now? I have a few questions for you:

Is it normal for 2 officials to watch 3 players come up the court without pressure or not?
What keys (rules of thumb or whatever) should the C use to transition up the court?
Should the Trail take a straight path up the court regardless of where players are?

Nah, I don't speak for "they". I have a hard enough time speaking for me.

I was, however, speaking to the way I read JR (one of "they") when he wrote the following.

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

That's why the C has to keep an eye on that play while he's releasing upcourt. He has to get crap like this because the trail can't. The C is the only one who can possibly see the separation and what's going on. In this situation, the C did exactly what he was supposed to do. The trail didn't miss a damn thing because there is nowayinhell any official in the world could ever make a call in that situation without guessing.

He said nothing about "all the time," as you noted in your response.

As for your follow up questions: I'm not questioning whether there may or may not have been room for improvement for the trail. I'm not addressing it because I don't think it matters in this context. It wouldn't have had any impact on the results; other than the fact that the T would have been the one getting mauled if he'd called the foul.

I would also question the harshness with which you brought it up. If you were speaking directly to him while watching film, would you have worded it that way, "You failed to do what you're getting to do."

[tomegun]

Rich, what is normal (for me) is to be aware of press versus no pressure. Once the C makes this determination, he or she moves up the court with the largest pack of players because he or she may have to make a call from sideline to sideline that the Trail or Lead cannot see.

Snaq, what exactly does it mean to "release upcourt"? I know I move in transition based on how many players are in the backcourt and where the largest group of players are. Without pressure and the largest group of players moving up court I would not lock on the ball like the C did in this play.

Nobody can say with certainty what would have happened if the Trail called the first foul so nobody can say it wouldn't have had an impact on the results.

Do officials realize we can always say "...has to get crap like this because the ... can't"? Fill in the blanks for any official and any spot on the court. This is one of the (fortunately) few times doing this helped...coincidentally, these plays seem to always involve watching the ball.

Hmm, I'm not sure how I would tell the official, but please don't confuse face to face conversation with typed words on an internet forum. Communication on here is similar to emails and I'm sure you get enough at home and work to know the delivery is often misunderstood.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Rich, what is normal (for me) is to be aware of press versus no pressure. Once the C makes this determination, he or she moves up the court with the largest pack of players because he or she may have to make a call from sideline to sideline that the Trail or Lead cannot see.

Snaq, what exactly does it mean to "release upcourt"? I know I move in transition based on how many players are in the backcourt and where the largest group of players are. Without pressure and the largest group of players moving up court I would not lock on the ball like the C did in this play.

Nobody can say with certainty what would have happened if the Trail called the first foul so nobody can say it wouldn't have had an impact on the results.

Do officials realize we can always say "...has to get crap like this because the ... can't"? Fill in the blanks for any official and any spot on the court. This is one of the (fortunately) few times doing this helped...coincidentally, these plays seem to always involve watching the ball.

Hmm, I'm not sure how I would tell the official, but please don't confuse face to face conversation with typed words on an internet forum. Communication on here is similar to emails and I'm sure you get enough at home and work to know the delivery is often misunderstood.

I'll say this, for me as C, I would have probably done as this guy did; hanging back and watching the tussle as I drift towards the division line. Right about the time he makes the call is when I'd turn my head and head down court (assuuming there's nothing going on).

It seems to me you're suggesting the C should have turned his head and sprinted downcourt as soon as he noted there was no press. I disagree with that (if it's what you're saying).

Fair enough, but if you were evaluating him and emailing him the results, would you have worded it that way? The limitations of email/written communication usually mean we should be more careful, not less. Although I should point out that I recognize my own failing in this regard.

Unless you think the player had an issue with the C personally, I can say with pretty strong certainty it wouldn't have mattered.