I'm not criticizing the early comments in the thread. I thought they were spot on.

I'm not defending the officiating in the video one bit.

I'm criticizing some of the comments that have come late in the thread that have said something to the effect of "a competent official would have fouled his a$$ out long before it got to foul #5."

It's officiating machismo, IMO, based on a lot of assumption and very little fact.

It's not delusional at all to look at play #5 and know that it is a flagrant foul and know without a doubt that you would have called a flagrant foul on that play. It's really easy, actually. That play needs, nor deserves, any context.

We aren't trying to prove a court case beyond a reasonable doubt, we are having a discussion about a basketball game and the officiating, or lack thereof.

I would have fouled his a$$ out.

I've never argued that play #5 shouldn't have been called a flagrant foul.

I agree with you, but some people think they are expert officials...when armed with a keyboard and mouse.

+1

+1

Well...through hard work and blessings I would be able to get into better position than at least two of them. As far as a blanket statement, I think most of us would do a better job. Some of these are so blatant that intentional fouls would leave our mouths open in shock. On two of these calls (IMO), the officials are two steps below what should have been called - they called common when they should have been flagrant. They are fortunate that the other team didn't retaliate. Or, the other coach could have really been a jerk...and what would they do about it? They already displayed the intestinal fortitude (you know what I really mean) to call what is right. Honestly, how long have you been doing this and have you ever had a situation where you had to throw a kid out of a game? What a Fiasco!

If I told you, I seriously doubt it would have any impact on how you view me, so what's the point?

I'm not quite sure who you're talking about, but I certainly know I have a hell of a lot to work on as an official.

But you know what they say about when you assume...

It's not a blanket statement nor does it have anything to do with me or saying how awesome I am.

It's clear that on the specific plays shown the officials did not close down, did not immediately talk to #34 (other than good naturedpat on the backside at the FT line), and did not get together to at least discuss the possibility of upgrading to intentional or flagrant.

The video evidence also makes it very clear to me that #34 did not come to play basketball that night and that myself and most of the officials I work with would have found opportunities to foul him out of the game before foul #5 took place. I don't know these officials, maybe they are top rate quality officials most of the time.

But on this night, on these plays, they were incompotent IMO. And that's why this video is being shown at association meetings across the country as a training resource.

So you can call it officiating machismo or make all of the flippant statements you want. It doesnt change the fact that what is on this tape is an example, and is being used as such, of incompotent officiating in regards to controlling rough play.

I mentioned this on the forum last season but I had a very similar play to #5 where I let my partner talk me out of assessing a flagrant foul and instead went with intentional. I knew I was wrong leaving the gym that night and I know if I ever see that again, I'm sticking with my call and tossing that player.

I'm all for officials. I've got the back of my officiating brethren. No one is saying that they are better than these officials. Just because you say, "Here is what *I* would have done in the situation..." does not mean that you are comparing yourself to them.

The fact is that these officials did a poor job. Period. It's not really even debatable. That doesn't make them bad officials or people. It just means that in this game they did a poor job.

It's easy for me (and others) to say that they would have fouled #34 out. Why? Because we have been there. We've had "that guy" in our game. Many times. And we took care of him. Maybe not early on in our careers, before we knew any better, but as we gained experience. We learned what to look for to avoid problems in our games, so when we see a guy like #34 he sticks out like a sore thumb and we think, "That's our guy."

I'm honestly not trying to be flippant when I say you need to re-examine your definition of the word "comparing."

Once again, who is saying that's debatable??

So have I. Saturday, in fact, I called two quick fouls on Red #32 because he was getting too physical in the post for my liking even after having a talk with him in the free throw lane. He sat for the rest of the game.

This isn't my first rodeo.

Time Frame
 

Would it make a difference to you to know that these clips were all from the first 10 minutes of game play?

I know a guy like that: never, ever, wants to toss a player (or a coach in baseball). I can understand having a high threshold, promoting participation, etc. But never? C'mon, man!

You have done this before, but you are missing the point again. All I said was I am sure there were other plays out there that would have produced a possibility for fouls. I did not say or even advocate that I would have definitely fouled the kid out before many of these plays. Just saying that not all fouls have to be hard or borderline flagrant/intentional to get a player out of the game. That is really all I am suggesting and since we do not see other situations that would have been obvious as to interaction with opponents, FT lineups and other aspects where a player like this would have revealed more things to make judgments on his overall behavior.

Peace

Maybe you need to look up the word "diplomacy".

You come off as abrasive and hostile.

I hear what you're saying. The majority of the post you just quoted wasn't directed at you specifically.