Louisville/Michigan- Natl Championship

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by peachbasket

Bad, that is a pretty broad based brush to paint with. I have not noticed that of Big 12 officials specifically, I do see it generally cross all leagues, predominately by older officials versus younger officials

I notice it most in B12 games.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

I don't know, you're the expert, you tell me. I'm guessing though that Higgins, Greene, and Cahill all must of called a ton of fouls this year as they averaged 33.9, 35.2, and 32.8 FPG respectively this season.

I am obviously more of an expert than you are. I work those games and monitor what gets called in my games. I had a game with about (correction) 55 fouls and it was a miserable night as an official. One team shot 38 FTs and the other shot 30 FTs and it was not a fun game in comparison to others. The score was 87-77. And when I told other officials how many fouls we called in that game, they were like "Damn that is a lot of fouls."

Peace

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am obviously more of an expert than you are. I work those games and monitor what gets called in my games. I had a game with about 43 fouls and it was a miserable night as an official. One team shot 38 FTs and the other shot 30 FTs and it was not a fun game in comparison to others. The score was 87-77. And when I told other officials how many fouls we called in that game, they were like "Damn that is a lot of fouls."

Peace

I think crews need to have this kind of awareness. I had a game this year and the crew called 32 fouls in the 1st half. In my opinion it was just too many. The half was excrutiating to be part of. There were too many whistles on marginal contact.

We talked at half, and only had 17 fouls the rest of the game. They were obvious, they fit the game, and they were correct.

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am obviously more of an expert than you are. I work those games and monitor what gets called in my games. I had a game with about (correction) 55 fouls and it was a miserable night as an official. One team shot 38 FTs and the other shot 30 FTs and it was not a fun game in comparison to others. The score was 87-77. And when I told other officials how many fouls we called in that game, they were like "Damn that is a lot of fouls."

Peace

I have no idea why this went from saying a game's foul count in the low/mid 30's is a 'lot of fouls' to talking about a game with 55 fouls.

Games in the 30's implies both teams probably got into bonus each half but probably not double-bonus. I call that a good night at the office. Evidently you don't, or maybe you do. It's hard to tell with someone who's all over the map....

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by IUgrad92

I have no idea why this went from saying a game's foul count in the low/mid 30's is a 'lot of fouls' to talking about a game with 55 fouls.

Games in the 30's implies both teams probably got into bonus each half but probably not double-bonus. I call that a good night at the office. Evidently you don't, or maybe you do. It's hard to tell with someone who's all over the map....

I really do not get what your point is. I think 30 plus fouls are quite a bit and usually results in a lot of FTs and players in foul trouble. If you have more than that number (which was suggested) then you really have a lot of problems. Many players last night were in foul trouble and if you have more fouls then players are sitting down more than they would have normally.

And I really think you should be careful talking about someone being all over the map when you have a problem with a shooting foul when a defender is not in LGP, not vertical and rules stipulate what happens with an airborne shooter and most of all interpretations that support that way of thinking. You need to get in that rulebook more and worry less about what I think about how many fouls are normal in a game.

Peace

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

I think crews need to have this kind of awareness. I had a game this year and the crew called 32 fouls in the 1st half. In my opinion it was just too many. The half was excrutiating to be part of. There were too many whistles on marginal contact.

We talked at half, and only had 17 fouls the rest of the game. They were obvious, they fit the game, and they were correct.

ICF -

Great point !!! What usually happens is some guy goes into the locker room at half time thinkin he just got right 7 whistles where he had "and 1's (hate that term), but the reality is he didn't have to call 6 of those because the kid played through marginal contact on all of them. The crew talks about it, players come out at half time referee is more patient and everyone is happy. Same contact occurs, ball goes in bucket and all is well!!!!

I think this is along the line of what Rut is talking about...

Long time ago went to a camp and was told "philisophically speaking" to keep the foul total below 40 and each team shooting less than 20 ft's a night and in most situations this will lead to a good night.....20 years later that statement proved right more often than wrong.....

I will now wait for the purists who don't go to camp to bash me

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

ICF -
Long time ago went to a camp and was told "philisophically speaking" to keep the foul total below 40 and each team shooting less than 20 ft's a night and in most situations this will lead to a good night.....20 years later that statement proved right more often than wrong.....

I will now wait for the purists who don't go to camp to bash me

I think a target foul count is a very bad idea. I'm quite OK with low foul counts and have had numerous games where the total count was in the 20's and maybe a few in the 10's. But if the trend is going higher, I'm not going to change the calls so I don't go over some magical number.

In reality, it is the way the teams play, more often than not, that affect the number of fouls committed. If they want to be sloppy and play poor defense, they end up with a lot of fouls and I'm not going to call less just to stay under 40. The game is going to be ugly if they're going to play ugly and pacing your foul count will definitely not make it better....it will probably make the game worse.

What usually happens is that, after a first half of a lot of fouls, most teams that are capable come out and play better basketball and the foul counts go down naturally.

Trying to avoid unnecessary foul calls is certainly a great goal but it is worse to have a nasty brawl just for the sake of having a low foul count.

[twocentsworth]

Here's a thought for everyone: why not simply blow the whistle when warranted.

Don't go into the game with an agenda to "get" a player or coach (ala Arizonas' Miller).
Don't go into a game with a pre-concieved notion of how many fouls are too many or too few.

[JRutledge]

I do not think the a goal is to be taken so literally that you only focus on the actual number. I think the goal is just that a goal to try to not call or over call the game where you are not adequately calling the right things. Heck in many cases we do not even control how many plays would be potential fouls. Shooting 3s or jump shots often lead to less fouls just like the more the ball goes in the hole are likely fewer opportunities to call a foul. But nothing wrong IMO in having a goal. That goal does not mean you will always accomplish them, which is why a lot of officials strive to call things that are obvious.

Peace

[pfan1981]

A would like to think a foul is a foul, period. I have heard officials on this forum say that if a team has only one good ball handler that they would try not to foul them out.....what??!?!!?

I had an ugly game where there was easily double bonus for both teams in both halfs. So some quick sports math puts that way over 40. It was a JV girls game, with no real player on either team. What are you suppos to do when they are all blatant? We called two intentional fouls as well. It was so bad the V refs wanted to make sure we knew we could "call" a game over. We knew this but played out the game anyway.

As far as being judged on the fouls you don't call......that seems a bit weird to me.

[APG]

How did these varsity referees suggest one go about "calling" a game over? Is this a specific area thing that is allowed there? I've never heard of anyone calling a game over just because a game was ugly or not well played.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by pfan1981

A would like to think a foul is a foul, period. I have heard officials on this forum say that if a team has only one good ball handler that they would try not to foul them out.....what??!?!!?

What the hell is a "foul is a foul?" Fouls are subjective and always will be. And those that call them the way the bosses want will continue and those that don't will not.

Peace

[pfan1981]

Originally Posted by APG

How did these varsity referees suggest one go about "calling" a game over? Is this a specific area thing that is allowed there? I've never heard of anyone calling a game over just because a game was ugly or not well played.

I don't have a rule book in front of me, but there is a stipulation about a game getting out of control. I am at a conference right now, but always watching the forum

[pfan1981]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What the hell is a "foul is a foul?" Fouls are subjective and always will be. And those that call them the way the bosses want will continue and those that don't will not.

Peace

I don't want to get in a forum fight here, but I don't think you should let the "bosses" dictate how you officiate. Who are the bosses? Are the affiliated with the mob? Kidding of course, but I call a fair game and a foul in the first is a foul in the 4th, why wouldn't it be? M

[IUgrad92]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You need to get in that rulebook more and worry less about what I think about how many fouls are normal in a game.

Peace

And on the flip side, you may want to crack open a dictionary and review the definition of 'catch'.....