Interesting End of Game Sequence

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And you're missing mbyron's point. It's the players' actions that determine the game. Making the calls that need to be made does not affect the game.

If B1 fouls A1 on a last second shot from half court, I don't affect the game by making the call. B1 affected the game by committing a stupid foul. The difference is important, more than semantic.

The only way we affect games is by injecting our personal philosophies that run counter to the rules. One example would be the "let the players decide the game" canard that people throw out at the end of the game. In my example, the official would be affecting the game by not making that call.

Thank you. Well said.

Of course it would be silly to deny that officials' actions affect the outcome. We stop the game for violations and fouls and enforce penalties accordingly. That's all part of the causal history of a game.

But good officiating is simply observing and reporting: the players' actions are the primary determinant of the outcome when officials enforce the rules and penalties properly.

When officials fail to make the right call due to some "personal philosophy" (good term) beyond the rules, mechanics, and traditions of interpretation, then they become the primary determinant of the outcome, and that's not a good thing.