A double-edged sword of sorts. Consistency, or satisfy a coach. I guess you have to decide what fits in your local group.

That's why I am still thinking about it. But there have always been things I have had to compromise on as I've moved up in any association. I really do get his point - it's just not the mindframe I'm used to being in.

For what it's worth, I think consistency is *always the point*. That's just me, though.

17 years ago when I first went to camp, the camp leaders (then college ball officials and now national and international officials) had us in groups to discuss the issues from non-officials angles. The two elements that each group came up with were consistency and communication. When a good friend of mine went to camp 10 years ago, the same conclusions were met. Now that I train my local board inexperienced officials, I asked them about their recent camp experiences. "Consistency and communication" were the two elements stressed. Guess what? 10 years from now it will be consistency and communication.

So what did he expect you to do, call a foul after the coach started complaining? How are you supposed to know that the coach would get upset over that play? Or was there contact on the play and you passed on it? (I see now that you said there was). I'm assuming there were other plays where the crew passed on contact and you say you had a game where there had been no issues with the coaches, so how are you supposed to know this one play would trigger something?

I see where your partner is coming from as far as learning a game mgmt tool, but I have a problem with the way he presented it, as if you were supposed to know that all of a sudden this one play would cause a problem.

Good question. I think he was irritated that he had to take the brunt of the coach's emotions. As I said earlier there was minimal contact that would not have been a foul at any other time in that game. If anything, the defensive player, who was faster and more athletic, had great position and it was the offensive player who created any of the contact. During the game, there were definitely more calls made against the losing team on drives to the basket because they were not nearly as athletic and able to control their bodies, so they would often be late defending and foul as a result. This play was just another case where the winning team was more athletic and able to maintain good defensive position and not foul as a result.

Just received an email listing the representatives from our association who have been assigned to the state tournament and this guy is one of the three on the list. So that certainly gives him some credibility. That's a pretty big honor in these parts...

While I can understand letting things go just a little bit in favor of a team getting shellacked... I can not justify what you were told here - to call a foul (or violation) where one doesn't exist.

Replies appreciated still seeking.
 

I get the general opinion when in a blowout game and issue being fair consistant and pecisehen making the tough call versus no call or making a mercy call when outcome has no bearing. But its evaluating the entire game in hindsite for that fair and consistant ending that begs me to frame a solid pregame, half and post the next time. Yes Im looking for that perfect pre mid post and during the game communication where the entire crew is in sync start to finish without philisophical, style or personality imbalance. I believe it can happen it s hould happen because its for kids players fans and the game.

Consistency? I have consistency in a blow out game...the player of the team losing breaks away for a 3 ft. jump shot...there is some "contact"...

I have a foul...almost always...what is NOT consistent with that? ;)

Listen to your "big dawg" Smitty.

Having said that and having read a lot about wiggle room and such, in this forum, newer officials should BEWARE!

I tell newer officials to just call the game. Call what they see. In my experiences...when I have tried to explain some of these "philosophical" principals that we have been discussing here...the officials' eyes glaze over and they end up not knowing if they should call a foul, travel, 3 seconds, enforce the box, etc. or when they should or should not call said violations and fouls.

I totally agree with Smitty's "big dawg's" philosophy.

But, you better have some credability and experience before you get too comfortable using that philosophy in a game situation.

Here's my question: Since he was the C, was he in position to call it late?

If he wants to do that then explain why he did it afterwards, especially as a senior guy, that's on him. As was mentioned before, if there hadn't been any problems up until that point there's no way for you to know there was going to be an issue.

Thanks for that.

Your Welcome, "Big Dawg"...

My welcome what? ;)

List
 

So, Smitty, were you on the list?

Post of the week.