What high school coaches want

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

- watch back-to-back calls.

If this means when the last call was a block, the next call should also be a block, I can't disagree enough.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If this means when the last call was a block, the next call should also be a block, I can't disagree enough.

Not to me.
It means that you can't have an illegal screen on white and then go down the court and miss one on blue. You can't penalize blue for carrying the ball or three seconds in the lane, when you have passed on the same things by white during the last few trips.
Taken in that context it makes better sense and has merit.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Not to me.
It means that you can't have an illegal screen on white and then go down the court and miss one on blue. You can't penalize blue for carrying the ball or three seconds in the lane, when you have passed on the same things by white during the last few trips.

The last few trips part is not relevant. There should be consistency throughout the game.


It's the "similar plays should/must be called alike" philosophy that makes me cringe.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The last few trips part is not relevant. There should be consistency throughout the game.


It's the "similar plays should/must be called alike" philosophy that makes me cringe.

The comment expressed by the group of coaches which we are discussing was "watch back-to-back calls."
So we are not talking about consistency throughout the game. That is desirable in its own right, but not pertinent to this specific concern being expressed by the coaches. They are trying to say that one thing that makes coaches upset is when calls during a short timeframe aren't handled in an equitable manner. People may not remember the call made back in the first quarter during the middle of the 3rd, but they certainly do recall what happened during the last couple of trips up and down the floor, so that action most certainly is relevant here.

To not think so is to fail to understand what the coaches are trying to communicate.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Not to me.
It means that you can't have an illegal screen on white and then go down the court and miss one on blue. You can't penalize blue for carrying the ball or three seconds in the lane, when you have passed on the same things by white during the last few trips.
Taken in that context it makes better sense and has merit.

For me, it makes sense. A crew has no chance of being consistent throughout an entire game if they can't be consistent for smaller chunks.

I take all this with a grain of salt, but we can't have similar things called differently at each end of the floor or by crewmates and instill any confidence in the coaches and participants.

[MD Longhorn]

Similar is not equal. What looks similar to a coach may not be the same at all from our perspective. Just because the close call on one end was a block doesn't mean the close call on the other end is not a charge.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

Similar is not equal. What looks similar to a coach may not be the same at all from our perspective. Just because the close call on one end was a block doesn't mean the close call on the other end is not a charge.

And yet, WE know what's similar. So how about applying the proper filter to what the coaches are saying and at least make sure we are consistently applying the rules and philosophies...

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If this means when the last call was a block, the next call should also be a block, I can't disagree enough.

Last summer at a camp I attended this was told to us.

If you have contact and a foul on one end, then the next trip on the other end if you have contact that is equal to or greater than what was just called you need to have a foul.

Conversely

If you have contact and no foul called, then the next trip, if you have contact that is equal to or less than what was just passed on you need to pass on it.

Consistency among the crew was his point.

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Last summer at a camp I attended this was told to us.

If you have contact and a foul on one end, then the next trip on the other end if you have contact that is equal to or greater than what was just called you need to have a foul.

Conversely

If you have contact and no foul called, then the next trip, if you have contact that is equal to or less than what was just passed on you need to pass on it.

Consistency among the crew was his point.

SO what would you do if you had contact at one end with no foul called and the pg powered through the (reach/hold/push off) and advances the ball. But the PG then applies similar pressure and contact to the less athletic player on the return trip and it drags them to the floor.

All actions and contact are not = .

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Pantherdreams

SO what would you do if you had contact at one end with no foul called and the pg powered through the (reach/hold/push off) and advances the ball. But the PG then applies similar pressure and contact to the less athletic player on the return trip and it drags them to the floor.

All actions and contact are not = .

I think you are taking what (at face value) is pretty sound advice and over-analyzing it.

[Adam]

How many coaches bother asking what officials want?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Adam

How many coaches bother asking what officials want?

How many camp sessions have we sat through where they bring in the coach(es) and they tell us all this stuff, and tell us how much they respect us and the job we do...then 4 or 5 months later there is that same coach yelling and stomping their foot and wondering why they just got T'd up.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

How many camp sessions have we sat through where they bring in the coach(es) and they tell us all this stuff, and tell us how much they respect us and the job we do...then 4 or 5 months later there is that same coach yelling and stomping their foot and wondering why they just got T'd up.

What I wonder is this . . .
After a game that, say, our crew didn't do its best, given what we had to work with or because we didn't have our "A" game that night, or after a game on which I felt I wasn't as good as I could have been, a sense of both feeling bad about it (yes, you can call it guilt, I guess) and of personal resolve to do better--to really nail it--on the next assignment results. Honest self-assessment leads properly to self-improvement.
On the other hand, does the occasional butt-head coach after his typical rant and rave and act just plain stupid game ever say to himself, "Ya know, I was a real A&$ tonight. I could have been more sportsmanlike. I feel bad about that and I'm gonna give it my all to be better on the sideline the next game. I've just got to improve myself."
Since the coaches who usually appear at our camps aren't the butt-heads, I guess I'll never know unless I ask one of the number I encounter occasionally during the season.
But I don't think so.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Last summer at a camp I attended this was told to us.

If you have contact and a foul on one end, then the next trip on the other end if you have contact that is equal to or greater than what was just called you need to have a foul.

Conversely

If you have contact and no foul called, then the next trip, if you have contact that is equal to or less than what was just passed on you need to pass on it.

Consistency among the crew was his point.

All this is a theory, and a good one, but that's all it is. You give this to the wrong coach, and all you have is more food for argument.

"C'mon, ref, that contact was equal to or greater than what you just called on us!!"

"No, coach, it wasn't even close."

Consistency is a by-product of good officiating, not a building block.

A pitch on the outside corner is a strike. The next pitch, also on the outside corner, is also a strike, because it was on the outside corner, not because it was in any way similar to the last pitch. The next pitch is a micro-inch further outside, still very similar, but it is a ball.