Timekeeper sneaking in subs

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by Adam

Our issue isn't your problem with it. The issue is your insinuation that it's a matter of integrity.

I haven't insinuated it. I've pretty plainly said that I think it's an integrity issue to intentionally set aside a rule because you don't feel like enforcing it for whatever reason.

I don't deny that you feel like you're on the side of angels. After all, you're just trying to let the benchwarmers get into the game. However, that doesn't make it acceptable. It's especially mind-boggling to me when there are far easier ways that are actually legal to get the players in ranging from a timeout to purposefully committing a turnover.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I haven't insinuated it. I've pretty plainly said that I think it's an integrity issue to intentionally set aside a rule because you don't feel like enforcing it for whatever reason.

I don't deny that you feel like you're on the side of angels. After all, you're just trying to let the benchwarmers get into the game. However, that doesn't make it acceptable. It's especially mind-boggling to me when there are far easier ways that are actually legal to get the players in ranging from a timeout to purposefully committing a turnover.

It's not a matter of integrity if the official readily admits that he is doing something outside the rules.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

It's not a matter of integrity if the official readily admits that he is doing something outside the rules.

It makes the official honest. That's not the same thing as integrity. Integrity is (in part) doing what you've agreed to do. Not enforcing the rules when you've agreed to enforce the rules is an integrity issue.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

It makes the official honest. That's not the same thing as integrity. Integrity is (in part) doing what you've agreed to do. Not enforcing the rules when you've agreed to enforce the rules is an integrity issue.

Thank you. I always need a reason to cry into my post-game beer. If my game tonight doesn't provide one, I'll remind myself of this thread.

[rockyroad]

As I said, I don't do this...but I don't think doing it is a sign of anyone's integrity when it is an accepted practice in their area.

Question for Eastshire: Team B is down by over 40 with less than a minute to play. Team A scores, And team B inbounds to their backup point guard who proceeds to travel before getting his dribble started 80 feet from the basket with no defender anywhere near him...are you going to call that travel?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

As I said, I don't do this...but I don't think doing it is a sign of anyone's integrity when it is an accepted practice in their area.

Question for Eastshire: Team B is down by over 40 with less than a minute to play. Team A scores, And team B inbounds to their backup point guard who proceeds to travel before getting his dribble started 80 feet from the basket with no defender anywhere near him...are you going to call that travel?

Yes. I'm going to hate it and wish it hadn't happened but if I call every travel I'm sure of regardless of the score.

The reality, however, is I'm probably not watching the guard close enough to catch it in this situation. So it probably slides not because I'm avoiding the rule but because I'm focusing on different priorities and don't see it well enough to call it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

As I said, I don't do this...but I don't think doing it is a sign of anyone's integrity when it is an accepted practice in their area.

Question for Eastshire: Team B is down by over 40 with less than a minute to play. Team A scores, And team B inbounds to their backup point guard who proceeds to travel before getting his dribble started 80 feet from the basket with no defender anywhere near him...are you going to call that travel?

Originally Posted by Eastshire

Yes. I'm going to hate it and wish it hadn't happened but if I call every travel I'm sure of regardless of the score.

The reality, however, is I'm probably not watching the guard close enough to catch it in this situation. So it probably slides not because I'm avoiding the rule but because I'm focusing on different priorities and don't see it well enough to call it.

Right there is an example of what I just cited, a bogus excuse as to why you aren't enforcing a rule. That is an integrity issue. Like someone is supposed to believe you are not watching the ball-handler when there is nothing else within 40' to look at.

An official with integrity will just admit that they passed on the call.

And an official who does make that travel call will eventually find a roadblock in their career progression.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

It makes the official honest. That's not the same thing as integrity. Integrity is (in part) doing what you've agreed to do. Not enforcing the rules when you've agreed to enforce the rules is an integrity issue.

Seriously, unless you're calling 3 seconds by the book, calling multiple fouls on a regular basis, and maintaining a ten second free throw count that is no longer than your back court count, your discussion of "integrity" rings hollow.

Not to mention that end line throw in violation against the losing team's third string forward with 45 seconds left in a 50 point game.

Your position essentially has you impugning the integrity of every official on this board.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

It makes the official honest. That's not the same thing as integrity. Integrity is (in part) doing what you've agreed to do. Not enforcing the rules when you've agreed to enforce the rules is an integrity issue.

Honesty is part of integrity. Some officials do stuff outside the rules then make up a million and one excuses as to why it is justified. That is a lack of integrity.

[maven]

"The rules" can refer to a lot of stuff:

• What's printed in the rule book
• National, state, or local interpretations
• The accepted traditions of the game
• Local expectations for how to call a game
• What's customary for the level

These don't always fit neatly together, and part of learning to officiate is learning to prioritize them in different circumstances. That's not easy, and it's not made any easier when someone comes along and starts challenging officials' integrity because they disagree with how the officials are sorting the "rules."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I haven't insinuated it. I've pretty plainly said that I think it's an integrity issue to intentionally set aside a rule because you don't feel like enforcing it for whatever reason.

I don't deny that you feel like you're on the side of angels. After all, you're just trying to let the benchwarmers get into the game. However, that doesn't make it acceptable. It's especially mind-boggling to me when there are far easier ways that are actually legal to get the players in ranging from a timeout to purposefully committing a turnover.

Angels? Hardly. I just don't think it's an integrity issue, and calling it such is just silly.