I reffed an 8th grade game with a coach known to be extremely vocal about calls and noncalls that don't exist. This time, his star player had three fouls in the first quarter, fair calls. My partner, an experienced guy, mentioned at the half that it was a shame this decent player had three fouls already, and we should make sure that if we call a foul on him, that it was a 'real' foul. He then privately told this coach that we wouldn't ticky-tack him out of the game. The coach showed tremendous respect to us at the end of the game (lost by 1). Does the end justify the means in this case? The player finished with 3 fouls, but I felt like I had to be cautious about calling against him. I don't think my partner was trying to tell ME something, because I only called one of the fouls, and it was obvious.

OUTRAGEOUS! The thought of protecting a player because he is a good player smacks of the NBA. If there is a foul, then call it. If it is a foul on player A1, then it should also be a foul against A2 or A3. When I work a game, I never see player's faces...only the color of the jersey and I think that this is the best way to go.

Behavior exhibited by this particular official puts the opposing team at a disadvantage and makes us all look bad.

IMHO, it is a part of good game management to be aware of players in foul trouble, because you DO want the disqualifying foul to be a good, solid call.

But talking to the coach about it, and the fact this player went the rest of the game without another foul is brutal.

I agree!!!
 

I have to agree. Knowing what the "star" has in fouls is very good management. If you foul out the "star" for ticky-tack fouls, you might have more trouble than you can ever realize. You should call fouls on good players regardless, just make sure you are not anticipating action or calling things that are not obvious. If they foul, they foul. Just make sure the last two especially are good ones.

Peace

I agree with Rut. Knowing who is in foul trouble, if you can remember, is good game management. It doesn't mean you don't call any more fouls on that player, it means that you remind yourself even more to "hold your whistle" to ensure that you don't call something on that player that you wish you could take back (inadvertant contact).

Now as far as your partner telling the coach...that was dumb. Talk about setting yourself if you do have to call another foul. :-)

Z

These are tough. I had an 8th grade game a few weeks ago.... one player was 6'8" and dominated. A real man among boys scenario.

Talk about challenging to keep game and call consistency - when the players skills were so diverse!

Just concentrate. We agreed to "call what we saw and forget the scorebook".

Biggest issue was other coach "needed our help" (my words) to try to get the stud out of the game. Everything the player did warranted a complaint. After he got his 35th point the coach gave up.

Tough situation.

6'8"????? To heck with LeBron James - someone needs to double check that this kid is eligible to play for an 8th grade team!!!

Wow!I never ever believe in making statements to a coach that sound like a promise to call or do anything except work hard and do my best.That partner who had experience had bad experience thats for sure.

Don't you do this on every call on every player during every game? You should NEVER take an individuals foul count into consideration when making your calls. To do so is a disservice to the other players and the game.

Officials who subscribe to this philosophy, and those who are in a position to eval the "moving up" of other officials who do use this technique ought to be drummed out of the officials ranks.

Favoritism is favoritism no matter how you try to rationalize it.

I'm with Mark. This is unethical and umbecoming of an official.

I'm on the side of the faceless player officials. I used to have a partner who knew exactly who the best players were and how many fouls they had. I didn't agree then and don't agree now. If you think it is a foul how can you decide in a split second whether it is a good foul or not. Most fouls kids commit aren't good fouls. But how can you not call a foul just because the best player might foul out? Is this fair to the other team that you might have called it if he only had two fouls? I had a game last night where the visiting team's best player got three well deserved fouls in the first quarter. He sat most of the rest of the first half. First possession of the third quarter the home team was playing man to man defense and a V player was running along the endline. The H defender was in pursuit. V2 (the best player with three fouls) steps into H1 actually hip-checking (a term from my hockey playing days!) him out of bounds. The contact was on his leg and hip, impossible to be construed as a legal screen. The coach said it was a horrible call. In my mind if I would have let that go, we would have been in for a very long night. It was already a 30 point game at that point.

mplagrow
 

As I read your post I was aghast. If I had an “experienced” partner making statements like that I would let him know I am calling them as I see them. I certainly would dissuade ANY contact with the coach that included acknowledgement of a player being in “foul trouble” and an indication, or “promise” to avoid ticky-tack calls.

If I am Coach B and I overhear this conversation, I am going to question your integrity on every call from that point, and rightfully so.

Add a big me too with those who find this outrageous.

Another reason I find it reprehensible is that such actions takes away a coaching possibility of the other team. When I coached and I knew that the star player of the other team was in foul trouble I would send my point guard past him so we could get a hold or a block call against him.

The likelihood of an 8th grade game being taped is small, but not unknown. At any level you better hope that it is not if you are going to hold your calls. I would hope the AD would be on the phone the next morning to your assignor.

Please re-read my post. You are twisting it. I use a "4 fouls on a player" scenario to once again remind myself to hold my whistle. Yes, I try to hold my whistle all game, but when I know there are player(s) in foul trouble, it's a good time for a <b> reminder.</b> Haven't you ever called a foul and then thought, "you know, letting that go would probably have been better in this game?" I have. I don't know any officials who haven't. Nothing wrong with using a game situation to again remind myself and focus my concentration even more. That's just good preventative officiating in my book. It doesn't change what I consider a foul. We all make mistakes, but making a mistake on the 5th foul is magnified even more because I just disqualified a player.

If a time-out is called with 5 seconds left in a game, don't you go over to your partner and go over a few things to make sure you get things right at the end? Aren't you supposed to be doing all those things you talk about anyway? Yes, but reminders help us focus. Focus good. Loss of focus bad. :-)

Z

Z

Thank you. We'll take a quick break; but then we're coming right back with more of the Tarzan, Tonto, and Frankenstein Show!!! :D

Chuck

Mark,
I work with 5 or 6 DII officials that are regularly telling me that #XX has a certain number of fouls.
During the game, they may as well be telling me what happened to their second cousin 12 years ago.
My acknowledgment is somewhere between "okay" and "uh".

This must be taught, learned and practiced in the required camps.
mick

Its a crock of #*!@#& is what it is. I side with the majority on this one. It can't happen.
I attended a clinic last year and a couple of "younger officials" who had worked the state tourney were there and talked to a group of officials and they came right out and said, "Know who the people paid to come and see", "Know who the Stars are" My partner and I looked at each other in disbelief. I guess it worked for them and got them to the state tourney.....

If we know the stars, we can give 'em a shirt. ;)

Please don't let the worst part of the NBA - star favoritizm - encroach into HSBB sportsmanship.

Look where it got the NBA ref's.

Did a game like this when Keith Bogans(?) was in the 8th grade at a private school (think it was Langley Day?). Coach told me he rarely ever let Keith play more than the 1st quarter because of his size and the fact that he was so talented. Bogans told me during a break in the 1st quarter that he was going to DeMatha the next year and he did.

We always try to attack the best players on the other team. If it is a post player, we will dump it in to our best post player and use moves designed to get them in foul trouble. If it is a guard, we will attack them consantly on the dribble. If they can't play both ends of the floor, they'll get hit with some fouls. If they can't face multiple players going at them all game, their feet will get slow on D and they'll draw some lazy reach in fouls by game's end.

Please don't tell me you are going to protect them because they can score. It kind of makes things a bit unbalanced against the other team.

Coach,
That's the way I learned to play the game. I rarely hear that anymore.
mick

Would this situation be considered favoritism?
A1 is the "star" player. They have 3 or 4 fouls. B1 comes driving through the lane. A1,A2 and A5 are all around the play. You see A1 slap the arm and A5 bumps B1 just afterwards. You come out and call the foul on A5.
To me this is different then Hawks scenario. If you are isolating and it is one on one, call it. If it is 5 it is 5. But if there is a crowd and you can chose, I am not sure that is favoritism. I think it falls under "game management".

Jmo,Fletch,but I think that you are WRONG,WRONG,WRONG!That's not game management,that's copping out on your duty as an official.A1 committed the first foul.That's what you should call.It's not our job to favor anybody on the court,and that's exactly what you're doing in this case.

"You see AI slap" STOP - Foul

"A5 bumps B1 just afterwards." Contact after the foul and I got nothing

REC, let me do a better job explaining my scenario. How many times have we seen a player driving down the lane and his defender is bumping him and another defender reaches in. We see the slap and we see the bump both in a split second if not simultaneous. Which one do you call? Did the bump lead to the slap, did the slap lead to the bump? All I am saying is if it is a "scrum" would you consider it favoritism by NOT calling a foul on the star when the foul could be called on a number of other players? My thought is no. (Assuming I am bright enough to know who the star player is, which is assuming a lot!)

Fletch,please think of it this way. There are two teams on the floor.You are favoring the star player's team if you don't call the foul on the proper player.At the same time,you are also screwing the other team completely.Somehow,I don't think that this is the way that Mr. Naismith intended his game to be officiated.If you're gonna call a foul,call it on the first player that commits one.

JR
I agree, while 90% of the time the person who commits a fould is obvious, but what about the 10%? Had a situation over the weekend that is not uncommon. B1 comes down with the rebound. A1 and A2 reach in to steal the ball. As he pivots I see a hand from A1 and a hand from A2 grabbing the wrists of B1. Who do you call the foul on? This type of play is not uncommon. The ball is on the ground and people are slapping and holding, or two players go up to block a shot and they both make contact with the shooter. What I am saying, is that in these instances, when there is NO CLEAR CUT INITIAL FOUL, why should you call it on the "star" player? If it is clear cut then you HAVE to call it, but what about that grey area?

IMO, you're better off flipping a coin. Star treatment is unbecoming an unbiased official, it IMO. Or better yet, a multiple foul. 4-19-10 NFHS

snaqs

If there is no clear cut initial foul,then you don't have any foul.You should never make any call that you're not sure of.You do call the first CLEAR CUT INITIAL FOUL that you see.You don't worry about who's actually committing that FIRST clear cut foul.If the star player happens to be the one that commits that FIRST clear cut foul,so be it.That's all I'm telling you,Fletch.

Look at this another way
 

This decision should not be based on the fact that A1 is a star and A2 is not (if you even know). If you know that A1 has 4 fouls and A2 has 1 foul, and you see something where you could call either way, go ahead and call A2. I am not saying protect A1, but rather, if you aren't positive, don't take A1 out on a maybe foul call.

If you know it was A1, I think they gotta go. It may seem fair to A to protect A1, but B is an equal partner in this and probably wants A1 off the floor. If B drew the 5th foul, they deserve the reward.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

If there is no clear cut initial foul,then you don't have any foul.You should never make any call that you're not sure of.You do call the first CLEAR CUT INITIAL FOUL that you see.You don't worry about who's actually committing that FIRST clear cut foul.If the star player happens to be the one that commits that FIRST clear cut foul,so be it.That's all I'm telling you,Fletch.

:confused: >If there is no clear cut initial foul,then you don't have any foul.< Then would you not have a Multiple Foul as in 4.19.10?

No question on the rest of the statement.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RecRef

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee Quote: If there is no clear cut initial foul,then you don't have any foul.You should never make any call that you're not sure of.You do call the first CLEAR CUT INITIAL FOUL that you see.You don't worry about who's actually committing that FIRST clear cut foul.If the star player happens to be the one that commits that FIRST clear cut foul,so be it.That's all I'm telling you,Fletch. :confused: >If there is no clear cut initial foul,then you don't have any foul.< Then would you not have a Multiple Foul as in 4.19.10? No question on the rest of the statement.

If both players commit a clear-cut foul at exactly the same time,you can call a multiple foul,by rule. I'm going by Fletch's original statement,which was that the star player fouled FIRST,but he's gonna call the foul on the player that fouled after him.If you do have two players clearly foul someone at the same time,you could pick one of them instead of calling the multiple.That's your choice and I don't have a problem with that.I do have a problem with anyone ignoring the first foul that actually is a foul,just because it's committed by a star player.

I'm going by Fletch's original statement,which was that the star player fouled FIRST,but he's gonna call the foul on the player that fouled after him.If you do have two players clearly foul someone at the same time,you could pick one of them instead of calling the multiple.

I think we are on the same page for the most part. We both agree if the star player clearly committs the initial foul you have to call it, I may not have made that clear. The only place we MAY differ is in the "no clear cut foul" scenario. I would like to see how many people have actually called a multiple foul in the scenario's I put forth. I agree with picking one of them, so we are in agreement there. I would NEVER let a star player committ a clear cut foul, or violation and NOT call it.