Ref the defense - then what?

[rickman5]

Originally Posted by Rufus

Had a situation during a private school VB contest last night, two-man crew. A1 is driving on a fast break, B2 is ahead of A1 and turns to try and establish LGP. My focus shifts to him because I want to know when/if he establishes.

A1 jumps for a try just below the free throw line extended and plows into B2. Because I was concentrating on B2 I knew he hadn't established LGP before A1 got airborne on the try so I called a block.

Here's the question - A1's take off was high in the key. B2 attempted to establish LGP low in the post. There's quite a bit of distance between them so, if I'm refereeing the defense, what can/should you do to be certain of what A1 did, and when, in terms of beginning the habitual shooting motion? I knew/saw in this case that A1 was airborne before B2 got established, but in thinking about it afterward I realized it was more happenstance than conscious thought/awareness and that kind of bugged me.

On a related note I'm starting to understand/appreciate the no-charge arcs in the NBA/NCAA.

With a two man crew I would try and get a wider angle on this play. You can still referee the defensive but you'd probably have a better look on the offensive player, even if its in the corner of your eye. If you're too tight to the play, you won't be able to see anything.

[bob jenkins]

The more players you can see, the better you'll referee.

[just another ref]

Does this thread not suggest that "referee the defense" is nothing more than a catch phase, which, like many things, when applied literally can, it itself, cause problems?

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does this thread not suggest that "referee the defense" is nothing more than a catch phase, which, like many things, when applied literally can, it itself, cause problems?

Maybe, and thanks for the replies. I can see now my thinking about this was too narrowly focused (or rather, being satisfied that I was able to transition to focusing mostly on the defense when appropriate). Of course we don't focus exclusively on the defense, but based on the responses it's clear I need to get wider and/or in better position to take in the whole play.

It's interesting, though, how the evolution of officiating goes from ball-watching (beginning), to refereeing the defense (mid-level?), to more situational awareness (higher level?). We talk a lot about seeing the entire play and I'm thinking that the words are important but, without the context of having experienced the deficiencies of each level (as well as being aware of the deficiencies experienced), it's difficult to do.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rufus

Maybe, and thanks for the replies. I can see now my thinking about this was too narrowly focused (or rather, being satisfied that I was able to transition to focusing mostly on the defense when appropriate). Of course we don't focus exclusively on the defense, but based on the responses it's clear I need to get wider and/or in better position to take in the whole play.

It's interesting, though, how the evolution of officiating goes from ball-watching (beginning), to refereeing the defense (mid-level?), to more situational awareness (higher level?). We talk a lot about seeing the entire play and I'm thinking that the words are important but, without the context of having experienced the deficiencies of each level (as well as being aware of the deficiencies experienced), it's difficult to do.

Usually this term is more for the younger officials that are surprised by some contact on a block/charge call and calls what they clearly did not see beforehand. The more experience you have, the less likely this is going to be used often in your terminology or even much in your thinking. Not to say it does not have usefulness as you become more experienced, but like anything you have to build on your experience and do more things or understand what it takes to be a good official.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Does this thread not suggest that "referee the defense" is nothing more than a catch phase, which, like many things, when applied literally can, it itself, cause problems?

I do not think it is a catch phrase when officials usually come into the game wanting to follow the ball as they are trained to do when watching games as a fan or even as a player. When I watch newer officials they almost always watch the ball and the phrase is there to get them to expand their view. This phrase is no different than other phrases that people use and misunderstand or take it too far or do not understand in the first place. All it really means is do not watch the ball or become a ball watcher. But even to know what to call you have to at some point watch the ball.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

All it really means is do not watch the ball or become a ball watcher. But even to know what to call you have to at some point watch the ball.

Maybe the catch phrase wasn't so bad after all.

[wfd21]

Rufus, remember the "RA" in NCAA comes into play for the secondary defender. Not the primary defender. In your situationn it sounds like B2 was the primary defender therfore the "RA" would not have come into play.