One question: How?

Since I said the same thing, I will defend. I saw the contact as marginal. From first glance the contact did not seem to be as much as the girls ending up on the ground made it seem. I feel once contact occurred, both players fell to the ground trying to sell the call in their favor. If this were a men's game I doubt either player would have fallen down from such contact.

As I said, I initially wanted to no-call this, but decided on block after a couple viewings. I do not see the B1 having LGP before A1 leaves the floor. B1 appears to be sliding to her right and moving slightly forward while A1 is airborne.

Why would this matter? Would officials of that caliber not want to teach me the right way to do it?

JetMetFan, would it be fair to say "don't call the iffy stuff outside your area, only make those calls which your partner will later thank you for getting"?

Because what is taught in camp is sometimes not practiced to that extent in real life or the games these officials actually work.

Go to enough camps and watch enough clinicians, you will see this is the case in many situations.

Peace

I've got a tough time with this reasoning, especially since the shooter was airborne. If you're airborne and hit an object that may/may not have been there when you left the ground, you'll most likely fall down. If the shooter lands then makes contact with the defender or if the defender was moving backwards at the time of contact, that's another story. Either way, contact doesn't have to be severe to warrant a foul call.



I think the fair thing to say would be give your partner a chance but ultimately make calls that need to be made. That's one thing I took from the camps I attended this summer. For me, play #1 falls into the category of a call that needed to be made.

Do as I say but not as I do? What are they trying to teach me?

This seems ambiguous, can you define it please?

Out of curiosity, how long have you been officiating and at what level(s)?

In camp they want to see that you know how to call your primary and that you recognize what is not your primary. They are not real games, they are teaching tools.

When she first started posting she was a shy flower who was intimidated by male coaches. Now all of a sudden she has the wisdom and courage of Teddy V. and Eric Brewton :rolleyes:

It's tough but I think Jeff put it best in post #22 of the thread:

if we pass on plays like that, bad things could happen

Basically, call the "elephants" in the room. The ones you need to get to preserve order or to keep coaches and/or players from losing control.

We're not all in agreement as to what should have been called on play #1 but if there's nothing called what will we hear? "How the xxxx can three of you miss something like that!!!" Given it happened in the first half - of a game that went to OT, btw - you're going to hear it all night AND from both benches...and you would've brought it on yourselves as a crew. You would also have heard a whole lot of complaining one way or another on play #2 if there's a no call on play #1 and rightfully so because they happened within a few minutes of one another.

There's no way the offensive player embellished because she was contacted while airborne. If you think the defender flopped to try to embellish the call, fine. Call her for a block and that problem is solved. If you think she was legal, call the PC since no player likes taking a knee to the chest. A no call opens up a huge can of worms.

Out of curiosity, how many officiating clinics have you had the primary responsibility of organizing and providing leadership upon? (edit) how many commendations have you been awarded for excellence in officiating?

None and none. Answering a question with a question: The sign of someone who is avoiding the initial question. Not shocking. I'm pretty sure I wouldn't believe your answer anyway. Makes no difference.

Would you mind answering why you would, in a million years, no call that first play, your excellence?

Seems to me that Smitty's question is genuine and relevant given the divergence of your opinion from the majority. Responding with non sequitur questions doesn't help, but feel free to answer your own question to Smitty if you think it will bolster your credibility or otherwise add to the discussion of the posted videos.

As I posted earlier:

Either a troll or someone with multiple personalities.

I will not speak for anyone else, but I have been responsible for many type clinics or was the person in charge of a session or presentation. And all I have ever noticed about previous playing experience is it helps an official with strategy and understanding what is going on from a team aspect, but not necessarily their rules or mechanics knowledge.

Peace

*lol @ shy flower---and this forum has Liberated me! Empowered me!

If that's what you were going for, then good for you. If you were trying to gain any credibility or respect, then not so good. Avoiding direct questions is a sure sign that you are probably a troll.