Took in a BV A-4 playoff game yesterday and saw the following play. This was a two whistle game.

A-1 is dribbling from the area left of the key and above the 3 pt arc and beginning to drive towards the hoop. T is on the same side of floor but well behind A-1. L has worked his way up under the basket as play comes his way.

As A-1 crosses the key enroute to the basket B-1 (whose movement is screened from L by players) moves out and bellybumps A-1 knocking him off track. L blows the whistle and calls a travel. Judging from the angle, I am sure the lead could not have seen B-1's movement and action, all he saw was the reroute of a-1 with the ball not being dribbled.

He received no help or imput from the T. He made the call and even though there was a fair amount imput from A-1's coach the call stood and away they went.

Anyway it got me to thinking, I know in 2 whistle in particular, you can't be everywhere and see everything all the time. I've had situations where as trail you'll get straight lined and see a player reach around a dribbler and then the ball is re routed. All you see is butts and backs but you know something had to have happened to reroute the ball. With all the age and wisdom on this board, what are your thoughts?? How do you guys handle situations like this?

One of the best pieces of advice I ever got was from my first camp. Do not call what you do not see. Don't ever guess! All your missed calls should be no-calls.

In your situation, the Lead did what he had to do. He saw the player move his pivot foot without dribbling. That's a travel. If the Trail doesn't come in and call the foul first, oh well. Nobody saw the bump. It happens.

Now, you can rip the Lead for being out of position, for being stuck behind the backboard. But you can't rip him for NOT calling what he didn't see.

Chuck

And you can rip the T for not moving his butt to get into a position to see the play...if the drive started in his area, he needs to take it all the way to the hoop...I know that was stressed the last two years in the WIAA clinics around the state...

My philosophy that I try to follow is, if you don't see it, don't call it. NEVER GUESS. It's almost better to have a no call in these situations sometimes. No matter what happens, the officials are going to get screamed at. But, maybe what the lead official should have done was to have talked to his partner and asked if he maybe saw something he didn't. Maybe an inadvertant whistle could have been called. Then again, maybe I needed to have been there to see the play.

Donj: "But, maybe what the lead official should have done was to have talked to his partner and asked if he maybe saw something he didn't."

**There wasn't a double whistle and it didn't look like there was much non-verbal communication between the partners either. In our area they pull officials from different districts in to do the games. Odds are these two guys had never worked together before

"rockyroad: And you can rip the T for not moving his butt to get into a position to see the play...if the drive started in his area, he needs to take it all the way to the hoop.. "

** I agree, the angle from the stands I had was roughly the same as the trail as I could see past his shoulder. He should have had as clear a view of the bump as I did....and A-1's coach as well

[Edited by NWRef on Mar 7th, 2003 at 01:04 PM]

"..IN MOST OF THE TIMES NO CALL IS THE BEST CALL"..

Theory.
 

I totally agree in thoery you should not call things you do not see. I agree that in a 2 person game it can be even more difficult to call many things with so much to cover. But I will say this. You will call things you do not see all the time. Or at least not see the entire play. You might see the very end and have to make a split second decision of what actually happen. So in other you might see a player get completely knocked to the floor and not see how they got there completely. But in a 2 person game, you might have to make some kind of call anyway. In 3 Person it is much easier to see everything from the beginning to the end. In 2 Person you might see the "second action" and not the first and have to make a call. It is just one of those flaws with the 2 Person system.

I do not know if anyone does baseball here, but even with 2 umpires you will have to make some sacrifices and make a call one way or another. The It is obviously more ideal to have 4 umpires who can cover the field much better, but when there is only two of you, you have to make the best of a not so great situation.


Peace

Yabut....
 

Rut,
The baseball metaphor is not totally applicable, because, as you know, with argumentative baseball players it's very acceptable <u>and</u> usually expected to go to another umpire, while in hoops, though it is acceptable, it is not necessarily expected that you ask a partner.
Different strokes for different folks....
mick

Re: Theory.
 

While kinda off-topic, I agree 100% with Rut on this. There is an element of "educated guessing" in 2-man when you're working a fast, competetive game, simply because there's too much happening at once. Not always, not most of the time, but occasionally you need to reconstruct what "might" have happened when making a call.

In the original sitch, if the T did not have a whistle there's no way he can help the L on this. As for not being in position, well, it happens in 2 man. Maybe this was one of those times where a good "guess" would have lead to the right call.

Re: Yabut....
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by JRutledge Rut, The baseball metaphor is not totally applicable, because, as you know, with argumentative baseball players it's very acceptable <u>and</u> usually expected to go to another umpire, while in hoops, though it is acceptable, it is not necessarily expected that you ask a partner. Different strokes for different folks.... mick

I think Dan got the essence of what I was trying to say overall.

But even in baseball, I am not going to my partner on many calls. I have to live and die with it because of where he is located and what was going on in his own area. You know if I was the base umpire and there is a play at second base with runners ahead of second coming home and the ball gets thrown to second base, that is my call all the way. My partner cannot help me on a tag or no tag sitaution. He just cannot.

Peace

Re: Re: Yabut....
 

YU.P., yU.P.

How about this one
 

Okay, in my AAU game yesterday, had a girl get poked in the eye. I didn't see it. I'm lead, opposite the benches, in the front court. Ball is on the baseline, benchside, and B1 is actively waving her arms to prevent a pass.
Next thing I know, A1 is crying and holding her eye.
Now, I'm pretty sure that B1 got her hand in there and poked her in the eye, but I didn't see it.
Should I have called it? Or just whistle an injury time-out and take the heat for a no-call?

Adam

Re: How about this one
 

Tough call.
Be willing to live with your decision.
I have blown more whistles for someone holding their face, than I have for someone hitting a face.

I had an explanation ready, but didn't need it. Coach seems to have been pretty smart, and must have known my dilemma, because he didn't question my no-call. BTW, same coach who my partner nearly T-d for asking him to hustle. Coach only questioned me once, and I subtly reminded him that I had pretty good position (on an OOB call). Not a single complaint the rest of the game towards me. Of course, his team was in the middle of a successful comeback.
Now, did he win because he focused on coaching, or did he refrain from complaining because he was winning? Chicken, or egg?

Adam

Not necessarily a foul.
 

Just because a player got poked into their eye, does not mean it was a foul that caused that.

If you saw the NC/Duke game, I did not think that was a foul. But that is just my opinion.

Peace

Re: Yabut....
 

Also, in baseball, a no-call is not an option.

Re: Re: Yabut....
 

Justa,
That's pretty close.
If we don't see an out, it has to be a <s>no-call</s> safe, but we have to say, "Safe". ;)
mick

Re: Re: Re: Yabut....
 

Exactly. In other words, you can't shrug you shoulders and act like you had something in your eye. (I hardly ever do that)

Re: Not necessarily a foul.
 

If a player has the ball, a defender is waving arms and accidentally pokes in the eye (and you see the poke in the eye), it is not clear to me why this is not a foul. It is contact, it is illegal,and it results in an unfair advantage for the defense.

To me,the accidental eye poke is like the accidental high stick in hockey - the defender may not have meant to do it, but when it happens, it should be a foul. I know it is not always called that way, but I wish it was.

Re: Re: Not necessarily a foul.
 

Coach, I agree with you. And I think (although I don't want to put words in his mouth) that Jeff would agree with you, too. But the incident in the Duke/UNC game -- which is what Jeff was referring to -- was not the kind of contact that you describe.

Chuck

Re: Re: Not necessarily a foul.
 

Well, basketball is not hockey. So if a player just falls to the ground, I am not calling something just because. There has to be contact, not just what looks like contact. Sorry, good no call.

Peace

Heh...this last post reminded me of the time when Danny Ainge was doing color commentary for TNT during a Utah Jazz game, and said, "One of these times, all five of the Utah defenders are just going to fall down." Referring to how the Jazz flop, and with Ainge just ending his tenure in Phoenix, it was pretty damn funny.

Anyways, carry on.

Re: Theory.
 

I had a situation happen earlier this season I'll put out there. I'm sure it will make me look incompetent, but hey, I'm pretty good at that:

2-whistle. I'm trail. Girl drives down the lane and right at the key moment, a defender screens me from the ball handler. Just as I take a step forward, the player goes down in a heap.

I hesitate, waiting for my partner to bail my sorry self out, and then....I blow my whistle and call a block on the girl that has her leg right about where it would need to be to trip the driver on the way by.

I made the right call, I know, because the girl put her hand up like they used to have to in the old days.

My fault I got screened, but I figure it would be worse to not call anything in this situation than to make an educated guess.

Beat me up now :)

Rich

Re: Re: Re: Not necessarily a foul.
 

Rut
I am not talking about imagining contact where none occurs. Read the whole post please. I stipulated that the ref must see the poke in the eye. Hockey is no different. You have to see the high stick to call the high stick. The principle that I was referring to in my post is very applicable - you have to be in control of your hands, arms, etc, just like the hockey player must control his stick.

Accidents that result in illegal contact are fouls. Seeing a player fall or grab an eye does not result in a foul if you see only the result and not the contact that caused it. I did not see the UNC-Duke game, so I don't know if it was a good or bad call (or no-call). I have seen many refs treat an accidental eye poke that they saw as incidental contact. I have had a ref tell me that he saw it, it was an accident, therefore no call. I strongly disagree with that opinion.

Re: Re: Theory.
 

Well in Boy's games, players flop all the time. So you better be sure in those games something took place before you call "phantom" calls. Or you might be doing girl's ball all the time.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Theory.
 

Hmmm, how likely is it for the ball handler to flop? I see defensive players do it all the time, but don't recall ever seeing the ballhandler flop. :confused:

We would not even be talking about this..........
 

All contact is not a foul. So just because a player got poked in the eye, did not mean a foul is the reason for that contact. You hockey comparison does not hold water. In Hockey I can assume that there was a check, it just comes down to the legality of that check. Not much different than a screen in basketball. I think I saw the Missouri Valley Conference Championship and a Southern Illinois player ran hard into a completely stationary (not completely required by rule btw) screen by a Creiaton(sp) player and the SIU player, shuttered in pain. Everything that happen was legal and the officials called nothing.

I will remember that the next time a kid falls down. I will assume that every time a player falls that he got there by another player or that they are not acting. And considering that the action in this game. The contact was not very obvious and if we did not see over and over again on replay, you might not even known that contact took place. And then what if he did not move, you still going to call a foul? I have seen players get hit and keep coming. You have not given me any evidence why this was a foul other than opinion. Contact is not a foul all by itself. Basketball can and is a rough game and all contact is not going to warrant or should bring a foul. This falls totally under the "incidental contact" section of the rule and if the player did not fall down, we would not even be discussing this. If his falling down is the only thing you can use as a foul, then to me it is not a foul.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Re: Theory.
 

So what you are telling me, a ball handler can only fall as a result of something illegal from the defense? Please tell me you are not serious? If you are, you might need to see more plays. I see ball handlers all the time fall and the defenders were in legal guarding position and just standing there. Just because there is contact, does not mean anything illegal took place. Calling all contact a foul to me is an easy way out. If you did not see a play, do not just make something up. You might be totally wrong.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Theory.
 

IMO you are likely to see ball handlers "flop" when they drive into the lane out of control or an offensive player recieves a pass off balance. There is contact but because the defender was legal and the offensive player caused all/any contact they end up on the floor. Sometimes (often times???) this contact is not severe enough so we pass on the PC foul and play on. The coach of the offensive team is usually whining about a block or protecting his shooter at this point...When in fact the only thing the player needs to be protected from is themselves...

Re: Re: Not necessarily a foul.
 

HAWKS:

Sitch: A defender has gained legal guarding pos. on your post player who is a good 6 inches taller than the defender who is behind her. Your girl recieves the ball and turns to make a move and leans into the outstretched hand (motionless w/in legal vertical plane) of defender. Would you be happy if I called a PC on your post player or if your player was the defender if I called a block. I think not. Sometimes contact is purely incedental and unfortunately injuries do happen sometimes do to incidental contact. It is not our responsibility to penalize the other team because of this

Re: Re: Re: Theory.
 

That's obnoxious, Rut. We call both boys and girls where I'm from. The girls' games are not given to "lesser" officials.

Rich

Re: Re: Re: Re: Theory.
 

Good for you. In my parts assignors to not schedule officials to both in most situations. The games are different and the expectations from the coaches and players are completely different. What was discribed sounded like a "girl's call" to me. But if you are calling contact just to be calling contact, then "Girl's games" is all you will be calling. Sorry, but the truth. The reason you do not see NCAA Officials switching back and forth. The games are not the same.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Re: Theory.
 

Rich, we do both boys and girls games here as well. But the only reason is that it was strongly suggested to the boys officials that we would do both, or our boys schedules would suffer.

You mention "where I'm from", and I think that's a big caveat. Around here, girls ball is pretty poor. In parts of PA, from what I understand, girls ball is outstanding. But "where I'm from", I concur with Jeff. Almost nobody who aspires to officiating high-level basketball wants to work girls games. Two average JV boys officials could handle most of the girls varsity games around here.

Chuck

I'm from Wisconsin, where boys games or girls games have the potential to be rather good or rather poor depending on the teams. I enjoy a good girls game more than a lousy boys game.

Our games are assigned by athletic directors (nonconference) and league commissioners. The commissioners here assign both boys and girls games and typically most people here work both. I do know some officials who only seek out boys games, but they are definitely in the minority. Our contracts typically contain both boys and girls games.

On retrospect, I'm sorry I posted the play I did. I post using my name and well, I don't want to get the reputation as something as horrible (HORRIBLE!) as a girls ref. I don't know how I'll sleep tonight without some NyQuil and a brown pop or ten ;)

The boys varsity games are frequently the eaaaaasiest to call anyway. The kids are simply more athletic and when there's a foul everyone in the gym knows it, for the most part. But that's a topic for another day.

Rich

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Mar 11th, 2003 at 09:47 PM]

Was not the same things.
 

Your example did not even fit the play that happen in the Duke/North Carolina game. These situations were not even close to the same. And yes to me (not that it means anything) the play you gave an example for was rather shallow to explain your point. And yes to me, the play you gave sounded like a girl's foul explaination. Because if you call something just because they fell down in a boy's game or Men's college game, the coaches and evaluators are going to have you for lunch. And I have done Men's and Women's college basketball games in Wisconsin, they expect different things from those sides of the ball. And on the boy's or Men's side of the ball, they do a whole lot of flopping, acting like they got hit or contacted when basically nothing happen. And if you are not ready for that, they will have you calling all kinds of stuff. So you better by sure you saw some contact, rather than calling something that looked like contact. Because in many loose ball situations, players run into each other and sometimes get hurt, and no one fouled anyone. And in the original situation, it was not obvious that he was hit and he definitely was not hit on purpose. If the NC player would have kept standing, this would have never been an issue. But understand this is my opinion. I am sure others like yourself will disagree. Officiating is an art, not always an exact science. Judgement plays a huge part in what they do. If either of us were on the game, we would have to answer individuals why or why not we made a call.

Peace

I didn't even see the play in question. I was off on some tangent, which isn't unusual.

We don't disagree at all with our opinions on those that "flop." It is a boys game phenomonon, I agree. I'm not sure I've ever seen a varsity girl flop. It is rare that the person with the ball flops, though.

I wonder why girls don't flop.

I also do not believe that contact necessarily implies a foul. Sometimes contact can be quite violent, obvious to all, and not a foul. Basketball, unlike chess, is not a non-contact sport. I do understand that.

Rich

[Edited by Rich Fronheiser on Mar 11th, 2003 at 10:14 PM]

Simple answer.
 

It is not taught and not ingrained in the minds of the players. Boy's start this crap in Junior High and some how think it helps them.

Girls seem to be more worried about dribbling at that age. Boys have a basketball in their cribs.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Theory.
 

What I'm telling you is that I don't ever recall seeing the ballhandler FLOP. Period. I'm not implying anything beyond that, so please don't infer anything beyond that. OTOH, I will be the first to admit that I need to see more plays.

It is amazing how a couple of people can take a situation and fundamentally alter it to continue making their case. Rut, I never was talking about imagining contact. I have said that twice, but you continue down a tangent that now includes flopping to draw a call. A visible poke in the eye clearly is not a flop. Chuck turns this into a specific situation of a taller player turning her face into the hand of a shorter player with legal guarding position. That is also not what I was referring to.

I am refering to a situation in which the contact is initiated by the defender moving their arms, the contact is a clear and painful poke in the eye, and the ref says that accidental equals incidental contact.

As for ball handlers flopping, don't see it much. Plenty of shooters take the flop on the drive into the lane, and we have it in MS girls as well. But then again, our MS girls usually have several years of travel ball under their belts, so they are not still trying to learn how to dribble :)

My MS girls completely destroyed a MS boys team recently in a scrimmage. We had beaten them only slightly in a scrimmage two weeks earlier, mainly because we were intimidated by their rep at the outset and took half the game to get going. On this second outing, the boys went the first 5 minutes without a look at the basket, and saw few after that. We ran a lay-up drill on them, which was interrupted only by some quality jump shots, backdoor cuts, and power post moves in the half court offense. The funniest thing was watching my girls help the boys up and ask them if they were ok. I am sure the boys were better, just having an off day I guess.

"Yep, I'm good. Landed on my ego...pretty sure it's only bruised." :D

I'm pretty sure that one dose of NyQuil has the same alcohol content as a brown-pop, anyway. Tastes about the same, too. Blech. http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk...icon_drool.gif

Then why do we use experienced officials for them? Why not put the new guys on the varsity games to get their feet wet on an easy game? Come on, Rich. http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk...pshakehead.gif

Chuck

Coach,I agree that the described action above is a foul.If you see it,it should be called,accidental or not.

Note that Chuck agreed with you too.

What, what, what?!?! http://www.stopstart.fsnet.co.uk/Gif/SPkyle.gif I know, I know. It's Stan's mom who says that, not Kyle. But I couldn't find Stan's mom. But anyway. . .

Hawks Coach. . . you callin' me out? You takin' a poke? ;) Heck, I don't mind being corrected when I'm wrong, but here's all I said about your "poke in the eye" situation.

Notice that the first thing I said was that I agree with you. If the official sees an accidental poke in the eye, especially if it results in a turnover, then it needs to be called a foul and not treated as incidental. I'm wit'choo, as my college roommate used to say.

All I was trying to point out was that the incident in the Duke game -- which Jeff had alluded to -- was a different sort of case from the one you brought up.

Friends? http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/cheers.gif

Chuck

You beat me JR, but only cuz I was looking for Stan's mom.

My bad Chuck . . .
 

This is what happens when you try to remember vs checking on a long thread - it was MN3Sport not Chuck. Mea culpa - I accept a poke in the eye with a pointed stick.

Re: My bad Chuck . . .
 

OWWWW! Not necessary, Coach. I think 50 lashes will suffice. :( http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/whip.gif

Chuck ;)

For an experienced official. I didn't say that, but I thought it was an obvious piece of the puzzle.

Have you worked any JV games recently? Sloppy slugfests that never put the officials in a good light. Girls' games can frequently be the same way -- lots of contact, lots of sloppiness, lots of scrambling, held balls, and turnovers.

A good boys game puts an experienced crew in the best light. But that's just my opinion.

Rich

Wait, wait, wait...
 

First you say this...

...now you say this:

I don't know, maybe I missed something and am mistaken in thinking that you've completely changed your tune...

Re: Wait, wait, wait...
 

He said he didn't wanna get stuck with girl's games all the time, but he still does them.

Re: Re: Wait, wait, wait...
 

Ahhh...I see. And could that be because he might then consider himself to be a "lesser" official?

Re: Re: Re: Wait, wait, wait...
 

Tsk, tsk.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Wait, wait, wait...
 

Yeah, I know...(shrug)

Re: Re: Wait, wait, wait...
 

Nobody wants to do girls games all the time, do they? But I don't see where calling them makes you a "lesser official." I find boys games more physically challenging, (you have to run more, as a rule) but often they seem to be easier to call because of a higher skill level.