Thoughts? (video)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

There is no "similar call". Even though the plays may be an inch apart, they may still fall on opposite sides of the fence. The last call/no call has zero bearing on the play at hand.

Tell that to my college supervisors or the NBA refs I've met.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I never have a mental list of the players that have four fouls. I'm in the majority with most of the guys, but not all of the guys, on my local board on this. If you mean that you know that this player has four and it would be a shame to call this weak foul as his fifth, then we're going to have to disagree. I make my decisions based on illegal contact, and incidental contact, not on weak versus strong, or three versus four fouls.

As you go up the ladder some would call this a matter of game awareness or, in the case of not knowing how many fouls certain players have, a lack of it. I hear it every year at camps: "Be aware of who has four fouls." As I've moved up I know I have a better idea of who has what, especially if I called one or two of the fouls on that player. Does it mean someone - star or otherwise - won't get dinged if they commit a foul? Of course not, but I'd like to think that foul wouldn't have been what I called to DQ someone.

An extra bit of background: that young lady happened to be her team's leading scorer and rebounder in that game (20/11) and had scored all of her team's points in overtime (either six or eight). I may not know how much she had for the game but I darn sure would've noticed she was scoring all her team's points in the OT. I'm not saying I would "cheat" and avoid giving her a foul she didn't deserve but if she's going to foul out you'd hope it would be a Stevie Wonder-type call anyone could see.

As I said earlier, the whole issue is compounded by the fact the guard on White got knocked down at the other end...a play which, interestingly enough, would've resulted in the big girl's fifth foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

...On the other hand, if you mean that it would be a shame for a player, star, or otherwise, to foul out on a weak foul, with no prior knowledge of foul trouble by the official, then we can agree, but again, it not a matter of weak versus strong to me, it's a matter of illegal contact versus incidental contact.

In an NCAA basetball game, you foul the star player out on that call from the video, you're getting a personal phone call from your supervisor.

[STFD]

Originally Posted by just another ref

There is no "similar call". Even though the plays may be an inch apart, they may still fall on opposite sides of the fence. The last call/no call has zero bearing on the play at hand.

My judgement's not good enough to judge plays that are inches apart. I'm with APG - it's best not to judge these plays in a vacuum and call similar plays similarly. Either way, this is a great discussion.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

As you go up the ladder some would call this a matter of game awareness or, in the case of not knowing how many fouls certain players have, a lack of it.

I've already been up the high school ladder, and I loved the view from up there. Now, at my age, it's, hopefully, going to be slow trip back down the ladder, and hopefully, I don't fall off the ladder.

I've always lived by this quote: "It pays to be nice to the people you meet on the way up, for they are the same people you meet on the way down."(Walter Winchell)

I've been nice to people on the way up. I hope that they're nice to me now that I'm on the way down.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In an NCAA basketball game, you foul the star player out on that call from the video, you're getting a personal phone call from your supervisor.

I was refereeing to officiating in general, not on that specific play, but your answer still makes me glad that I'm just a high school official. We seldom get any phone calls like this, in fact, it's usually us making the phone call to our assigner, usually to give him a heads up as to why we may have tossed a coach, or a player, if any phone calls are made at all. On my level, high school varsity, we would never get a phone call about a specific foul call, even if it fouled out the best player in that state. Pressure, and accountability. That's why you college guys make the big bucks, and you deserve them.

[johnny d]

Big bucks.......funny, real funny, you obviously haven't seen a D3 check in some time. Not exactly big bucks for those games.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Big bucks.......funny, real funny, you obviously haven't seen a D3 check in some time. Not exactly big bucks for those games.

I've never seen a D3 check, but it's got to be bigger than the $89.76 that I get for doing a high school game? And we don't get mileage. If we're lucky, we get a warm bottle of water at halftime. One bottle that we split, two ways, two, remember, we're the Land That Time Forgot.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I've never seen a D3 check, but it's got to be bigger than the $89.76 that I get for doing a high school game? And we don't get mileage. If we're lucky, we get a warm bottle of water at halftime. One bottle that we split, two ways, two, remember, we're the Land That Time Forgot.

Not necessarily, when one takes into account the time on the road for some of these D3 games.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by STFD

My judgement's not good enough to judge plays that are inches apart. I'm with APG - it's best not to judge these plays in a vacuum and call similar plays similarly. Either way, this is a great discussion.

Whether it's good enough or not, that's still what you have to do.

According to what you're saying, here is what I see.

Foul called on one end. Next play slightly less contact, but similar. So it still has to be a foul. Next play even less contact, but still similar.

etc.

Any way you look at it, this philosophy will eventually cause something to be called wrong.

[OKREF]

Had an evaluator at camp put it like this. We need to be consistent as a crew. If we have a foul on one end, then when we go to the other end if we have contact that is either equal to or greater than what was just called, you need to have a call. Conversely, if we pass on some marginal contact, then on the other end if the contact is equal to or less, then we should have a no call. Now obviously he was talking about successive trips down the floor, not 3,4,5 trips after.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Whether it's good enough or not, that's still what you have to do.

According to what you're saying, here is what I see.

Foul called on one end. Next play slightly less contact, but similar. So it still has to be a foul. Next play even less contact, but still similar.

etc.

Any way you look at it, this philosophy will eventually cause something to be called wrong.

The ability to properly execute this philosophy gets officials hired on to college staffs.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Had an evaluator at camp put it like this. We need to be consistent as a crew. If we have a foul on one end, then when we go to the other end if we have contact that is either equal to or greater than what was just called, you need to have a call.

Couple of questions.

First, what if your partner made a foul call which you saw differently? Would you make the same call at the other end in the name of consistency?


Also, if you have a foul on one end, followed by equal or greater contact on the other end, it goes without saying that it should also be a foul.

But what if the contact on the second play is slightly less? It may still be similar.

Lines must be drawn.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Couple of questions.

First, what if your partner made a foul call which you saw differently? Would you make the same call at the other end in the name of consistency?


Also, if you have a foul on one end, followed by equal or greater contact on the other end, it goes without saying that it should also be a foul.

But what if the contact on the second play is slightly less? It may still be similar.

Lines must be drawn.

This is why you get paid the big bucks. You have to decide what happened in other plays if you want to work that level? Why, because there is tape that will either show you somehow help decide if you are calling what is appropriate. Again this is one of many things that separate the guy that works HS and feels we should call everything to the college guy that had to make decisions that fall into a larger philosophy. And as a HS official not many games have great tape on plays. At the college level tape is used to evaluate almost everything.

Peace

[STFD]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Whether it's good enough or not, that's still what you have to do.

According to what you're saying, here is what I see.

Foul called on one end. Next play slightly less contact, but similar. So it still has to be a foul. Next play even less contact, but still similar.

etc.

Any way you look at it, this philosophy will eventually cause something to be called wrong.

I suppose that this philosophy combined with the back-to-back-to-back scenario that you cite could lead one down a slippery slope that ends up at an incorrect call. However, I have yet to see it. On the other hand, I have seen plenty of examples where similar back-to-back plays are called differently - leaving coaches, players, fans, partners, and supervisors scratching their heads. For a crew made up of officials with different play calling perspectives, I think the philosophy helps us remain more consistent across the crew. For me, it helps me focus and stay away from particularly boneheaded decisions.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why, because there is tape that will either show you somehow help decide if you are calling what is appropriate.

And if opposite calls on back to back "similar" plays is correct, the tape will also show this.