Don't Understand !!

[MN BB Ref]

AMEN...we don't decide the games...the actions of the players decides the games! This is a "not so smart" action that may or may not decide this particular game. If we go back to the original post, the player was awarded the 1 and 1 and they missed the front end. With that being the case I'm willing to bet they wouldn't have made 2 of the 3 anyway...thus the players still are deciding the game...not us. We didn't award the player/team 3 points...we correctly awarded them the opportunity to make those points themselves. They still have to shoot them and in a pressure situation an 85% free throw shooter probably just became a 65% shooter. Gotta call the foul!

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by A Pennsylvania Coach

Unbelievable. My jaw is on the floor. Your quote "If you make that call, you are determining the game because you just provided a 40% great opportunity for that team to catch up." is the one that burns me up. It's not about you, it's about the participants. The participant committed the foul. The fouling player is the one who handed the 40% greater opportunity to the team that was fouled, not the official.

The math thing is ridiculous. Say I have a player shooting 85% on FTs but only 15% on threes. Anytime she gets fouled on a three-point attempt, you should ignore it based on your logic.

Based on his logic we should ignore ALL shooting fouls since typically players have a higher FT % than FG %. In fact, we should also ignore any non-shooting fouls when we are in the bonus because we are converting a 0% opportunity to score into a real opportunity to score.

(There's more than 1 engineer here. )

[mikesears]

Originally posted by mikesears

I've got to agree and have experience with a partner making such a call in a girls Varsity game I worked several years ago.

Schools were friendly rivals because they used to play as a co-op team. Team A down by 1 by about 00:08.00 left on the clock. Girl dribbles to half court and heaves up a prayer with about :01 left, buzzer sounds, and I hear a whistle from T at same time as buzzer. We try to quickly talk him out of the foul but he insists. Player makes 2 of 3 with the lane cleared to win the game. Our ratings for that game were the worst for that year.

Maybe he believed that going to OT was a sign of poor officiating

To clarify, it was one of those slight contact things that didn't really put the shooter at a disadvantage but would have impeded her progress for a rebound if there had been time left and she had been closer to the basket. To restate, the ball was away, then there was slight contact that MIGHT have been a foul. I won't argue that you should NEVER call a foul in that situation. I guess I would say, "only call the foul if it is obvious."

[Edited by mikesears on Feb 5th, 2003 at 11:39 AM]

[TriggerMN]

When did this become a math forum? First we have the "multiple foul postulate" stating that it's basically impossible to have a multiple foul because of numbers and physics and the human brain, and now we have "free throw probability theorems" about the chances a coin will come up on its edge.

Man, I went to college, I thought I was done with calculus!!

FWIW, it's hard to comment on a game-ending foul or no foul situation, if you're not there to actually see it. A good official will go with his/her best judgement.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Maybe I misinterpreted the scenario. Maybe I shouldn't have brought math into this. But you guys are all neglecting the judgement of the official. If the "shooter" gets creamed in the back court, call the foul. If two players are scrambling for the ball and there is some minor contact don't decide that this is a 3-point attempt and don't call a shooting foul.

I interpreted the description to be the latter case - minor contact, long distance from the goal, short amount of time on the clock. Unless it is obvious there was a shot attempt and that the defense definitely committed a foul on the shooter I am not going to put the shooter 50 feet closer to the basket and let him have a BETTER opportunity to get back in the game.

Some ticky tack calls can be made during the beginning and middle of the game as instructional - this is how we are going to call the game and I won't allow you to do that => foul. At the end of the game you are no longer instructing or establishing boundaries; you are now enforcing what boundaries you have already established. In this scenario, you've got a brand new activity that you haven't seen during the game - a last second hail mary from 70 feet. To late for instruction. People, I'm not going to call a ticky tack foul here. You can if you like BUT I'M NOT GOING TO. All facets of the supposed "shooter's" intent and the foul have got to be obvious in this situation or I'm not going to call a foul. I personally feel that influence the outcome of the game.

I think if you look back at the orginal post you will find that the officials got together and discussed these things. They decided the player was not shooting but that he was fouled - he got a 1 and 1.

We are arguing semantics about the judgement of a play that the vast majority of us did not see. I interpreted it differently than you did.

The original question of this post was why do officials not make the same calls in the last seconds of the game. To me, the answer is simple, IT IS A DIFFERENT SITUATION and they are not the same calls because the situation is different. Additionally, and probably more fundamental, is that the perspective of the team/players who are behind has changed to one of desparation - I've got to work harder, jump higher, play tighter, press my advantage with more vigor, were running out of time; I've got to do this NOW. It is a different ball game. As an official I need to make adjustments to this strikingly different tempo and physicalness. As a player or a fan you may be expecting the same instructional or boundary type calls that were made 20 minutes earlier. It is often not the same game anymore and the different style of play demands different calls to be made and different allowances to be given.

Folks this is just my humble opinion. You can all jump on me now if you feel so inclined... or drop your jaws or whatever.... call a foul... call some lane vioaltions when he misses... keep it close.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Perhaps I'm overreacting. I had a horrible partner last night that I believe would have called the shooting foul and would have called the necessary lane violations to keep his district's team in the contest.

He made many, very questionable calls, that created probably 15 points for the team from his district. I was flabergasted and stunned.

[MN BB Ref]

Tony,

If you seriously question the integrity of this official then you have an obligation to report that to your association or the state high school league. Its hard enough being viewed as impartial as it is, but impossible when you have someone who does have a vested interest in the outcome of the game.

[canuckrefguy]

Originally posted by williebfree
I agree with Rich that it is easy to "pontificate" the "a foul is a foul" theology here on the internet, but what happens on the court may be different.

And Mr. Denucci thought there was a lack of controversy....

Amen to Willie and Rich...

What baffles me here is how the message is being lost. What Rich says does not mean it's open season in the closing seconds of a close game, or that legitimate fouls should not be called. But good game management dictates that there will occasionally be situational officiating.

It is my firm belief that players/coaches on both sides would rather the officials err on the side of NOT blowing the whistle in these situations.

By the way, how many points does willie get for using "pontificate"?

[Rich]

The scoring on pontificate depends on whether there is a double- or triple-word score in effect.

The canuck said it perfectly.

It is not blasphemous to consider the situation at the end of a close game.

I want to know the situation. And a foul is definitely not a foul, regardless of what everyone says here.

Here's a situation: A leads by four with a minute left and has the ball. They inbound and B clearly wants a foul.

Is your standard for calling that foul the same as in the opening minute of the game? If it is, you're setting yourself up for disaster. You call the first foul you can and quickly line up to shoot the free throws, or the defense will make sure you call a foul by knocking the ball-handler's head off.

Court awareness and situation handling at the end of a game, in my opinion, is one of the most important things a good official learns.

I never said I wouldn't call a foul in the original situation. I just said it wouldn't be a likely occurrence. With .9 second on the clock and the clock starting on the first touch, it would be very unlikely to have a shooting foul.

Rich

[Ref in PA]

After reading all the posts, I want to reply, but all the responses are taken. Most of us would call a foul if the player was mugged, most of us would pass if the contact was deemed incidental. You don't want to bail out a team on a desperation play nor do you want to legitimize "making sure" the shot misses. So, bottom line is, you gotta see the play. I would hope that all of us has the cajones to call our own game and not be influenced by other circumstances.

[gsf23]

My question to those who are asking why do officials call things different in the beginning of the game than at the end in this situation would be: Was there a 70' hail mary shot in the first, second or third quarter? If the answer is no then how can you now say that they are calling the game differently?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
[/B]

There's more than 1 engineer here. [/B][/QUOTE]I always wanted to be an engineer,too.Lemme see-so far we got:

Dan
Downtown Tony Brown
Mark T. DeNucci Sr.

Any other engineers here?

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

There's more than 1 engineer here. [/B]

I always wanted to be an engineer,too.Lemme see-so far we got:

Dan
Downtown Tony Brown
Mark T. DeNucci Sr.

Any other engineers here? [/B][/QUOTE]

I are a en-gineer and I are proud uv it!



BTW, I see from the length of their posts that both Downtown & MTD suffer from engineer's disease.

[Hawks Coach]

but I'll add my thoughts anyway.

As a coach, we don't really expect to get a foul call on a half court shot attempt, unless the contact is pretty hard. The criteria for calling a foul on the 8 foot jump shot and the 70 foot shot are not the same, nor do I believe they should be. I think you should know if you have to make a call and make it.

And I am saying this regardless of who has the ball, my team or theirs.

[Jay R]

Rather than getting in to the details of this thread, I'll just make one comment. I grew up playing hockey where it is widely accepted that the ref puts away the whistle in the third period. I never liked that idea and I believe that basketball is better off because the refs will make calls late in the game.