Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by 7IronRef

Really? What a waste of time. Time would be better spent elsewhere.

As a former member of my local board's training committees (both rules, and mechanics), and a current member of the newsletter committee, I respectfully disagree with you. The time to get rid of bad habits, no matter how minor those bad habits can be, is in the training stage, before these bad habits develop. It's tougher with veteran officials, we tend to be a pretty ornery bunch. Here in my little corner of Connecticut, we are constantly looking to improve our "product". Our board officers, our executive committee, our interpreter, and assistant interpreters, and our various committee chairs, are never content to rest on our laurels. Say what you will about IAABO, and I do have some problems with IAABO (see post #112), but, warts, and all, it's an organization dedicated to the education, and improvement, of basketball officials, and, at least here, on the local level, it does a pretty good job at fulfilling its goals.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Hmmmm? Let's see? Because they can move?

And you think a player is really confused as to how they can or cannot move? OK, go with that one.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And you think a player is really confused as to how they can or cannot move? OK, go with that one.

Peace

You never see a thrower keep his pivot foot as if his life depended on it?

Ok.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Adam

You never see a thrower keep his pivot foot as if his life depended on it?

Ok.

They can do that without us saying anything to them. You think they listen to us that deep and only go by what we tell them?

Just like another comment Billy likes to suggest we cannot say. If you tell a player they cannot wear jewelry, I have never seen a player really think that that means nothing more than their playing eligibility for the moment. I have never had a player think that because we address a jewelry issue that means at all times they cannot wear that item. But if guys on here have, that would be a first for me.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They can do that without us saying anything to them. You think they listen to us that deep and only go by what we tell them?

Just like another comment Billy likes to suggest we cannot say. If you tell a player they cannot wear jewelry, I have never seen a player really think that that means nothing more than their playing eligibility for the moment. I have never had a player think that because we address a jewelry issue that means at all times they cannot wear that item. But if guys on here have, that would be a first for me.

Peace

They do lots of things without us telling them anything; but I'm not convinced it didn't start long before my game, because a coach or official told them they couldn't move or called them for traveling during a throw in.

I've never seen Billy (or anyone) indicate players would get that misperception, but ok.

I have seen a silly distinction between telling a player they have to take his jewelry off and telling him he can't play with it in. Nothing to do with the player's perceptions of his jewelry capabilities post game, more of a legalese distinction without a real difference.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And you think a player is really confused as to how they can or cannot move?

Players will often ask the administering official, but that question is usually in reference to whether, or not, they can run the endline, and I know that that's not what JRutledge is talking about.

Almost all players will either stand in their little shoulder width area, or run the endline, depending on the type of throwin. I'm pretty sure that most, but probably not all, know that they don't have to maintain a "pivot foot". I only see one, or two, inbounding excessive movement violations each season, but I also rarely see players under defensive pressure take full advantage of the liberal movement rule on a designated spot throwin. I really don't think that a large number of players actually know that the movement limits on a "spot" thrownin are actually more liberal than they believe.

Now, coaches are another story, and my main concern for avoiding, "Don't move". I know at least one, the one that I had to sit down, who thought that, "Don't move", that he probably heard from other officials on my local board (or maybe from JRutledge), either as a coach, or as a player, a few years ago, really meant "Don't move".

And lets' not forget about the occasional, incorrect, inbounding "travel" call, either from an ignorant official, or expected from an ignorant coach, or a fan. Maybe we've never observed it in person, but it's not a myth, it does exist, not often, but it really exists, like Sasquatch. Wait? I'm being told ... What?. Never mind.

[just another ref]

This is a good example of a player being handicapped if he doesn't know the details of a rule. If the thrower is pressured, he needs to take advantage of the freedom that he does have. This is, after all, the only place where a ball fake can include jumping and returning to the floor.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Just like another comment Billy likes to suggest we cannot say. If you tell a player they cannot wear jewelry, I have never seen a player really think that that means nothing more than their playing eligibility for the moment. I have never had a player think that because we address a jewelry issue that means at all times they cannot wear that item. But if guys on here have, that would be a first for me.

And for me, too. Please don't twist my words. I've already stated that this (jewelry) is a local issue. It has been a custom, on our local board, advice given to us by two different interpreters, over more than thirty years, that as a liability issue, we don't tell players to remove jewelry, but rather, we inform them that they can't play while wearing jewelry. Now they have an option. What they do after that is no concern of ours, but we won't let them play while they are wearing jewelry. Pretty much the same end, just different means. Hair splitting? Certainly, but it's just local, not for general use.

It's pretty far fetched. We tell a player to remove their new earrings that the doctor told them not to remove for a few weeks. They somehow get an infection. The parent blames us, because we didn't give them any options, like the option of keeping the earrings in, and not playing in that night's game. Far fetched? Yes. Could this create some type of liability? Probably not, but anybody can sue anybody, for practically any reason. Would the parent win? Probably not, but the official would still need an attorney, and have to take time away from their day job to attend meetings, depositions, court proceedings, etc. Will this ever happen real life? No, but why chance it when a simple, "You can't play with earrings", will take care of the business?

And I believe that I have heard this suggested on the Forum, by Forum members outside my local area, so it's probably not just in my little corner of Connecticut.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is, after all, the only place where a ball fake can include jumping and returning to the floor.

Wow. I never considered this scenario. Now I'm even more adamant about this issue. Great? I was just starting to calm down. Or getting bored? Or both getting bored, and calming down? Now I feel like I drank one of those five hour energy drinks. I'm ready to go a few more rounds, but knowing JRutledge, from his frequent contributions to the Forum, he will never give up. What a persistent young man? He was really wearing me down. I almost gave up.

In any case, I'll see you guys later, I've got to go out for my Saturday run, then mow the lawn, and then go to church. I'll check in later, or maybe the "energy" will wear off, and I'll go to bed early tonight?

[JRutledge]

Billy, I am not twisting your words. Just stating that most people are not taking us that seriously. They are not doing things as if we are the only people that know the rules and they only take our lead. Coaches, fellow players and fans have influence over what they know about the rules in these situations. I have had situations where likely nothing was said and a coach thinks that a thrower that moved violated on a designated spot. And I do other sports like football that has many more misconceptions about basic rules than basketball and they argue all the time an NFL or NCAA rule or ruling that has no bearing on the level being officiated at the time. Sorry, we are not that damn important to their knowledge of the game.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They can do that without us saying anything to them.

Largely because they've heard it before from officials who are misstating the restrictions...and some that even call it wrong. I've seen it called wrong a few times in the last few years in NCAA D1 games even....perpetuating the myth to millions at a time. With every official who confirms it by saying "don't move", that is one more player that believes the wrong thing. And then, some of them become officials and call it that way because they believe it to be that way.

Why insist on doing something incorrect when it is just as easy to do it right? Why be party to the proliferation of a fallacy when you can accomplish all you need and be accurate without any more effort than just admitting that 'don't move' is simply not accurate or correct and changing to "spot throw" or something like that which doesn't imply restrictions that don't exist?

It is hard to for whoever is responsible for the teaching of the players to do it right when they have people in positions of authority directing their players incorrectly.

[JRutledge]

So once again you think all myths and misconceptions are based off of what officials tell them? Yeah right.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So once again you think all myths and misconceptions are based off of what officials tell them? Yeah right.

Peace

Maybe not the only source but why insist on being part of the problem when you can be part of the solution?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Maybe not the only source but why insist on being part of the problem when you can be part of the solution?

I am not insisting on anything but that no one really cares that much what we say. They have plenty influences other than us. Once again, it really does not matter what we say, they do not take us that literally as you and others are trying to make it.

And I just came from an NCAA Football meeting where if you would listen to the media, you would think hard hits are illegal in the game all because they listened to the media. Not true, but that is what players and coaches and fans think are the rules outlaw.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They are not doing things as if we are the only people that know the rules and they only take our lead. Coaches, fellow players and fans have influence over what they know about the rules in these situations.

Agree, but we should still set a good example.