Questioning Partner's Call

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Several times you mentioned that you were the assigner -- that doesn't give you any extra rights / responsibilities during the game to go to your partner. I wonder if that "I'm the assigner" attitude doesn't carry over into other interactions with this official.

When you went to him, he said that control was gained in the FC. That can be done with one hand. No need to question him further.

You came here asking for advice, and you got it (some of which agreed with you and some of which didn't). Now you are not seeming to take it, and are just defending your position. It's like going to a camp -- take what works for you and ignore the rest.

The other official was wrong in how he communicated back to you later. You were wrong in how you handled it initially. Both imo, of course.

This. All of this.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

...

Unfortunately, you don't know how AAU works. Teams pay money to play in these tournaments, so yes having a bad crew does leave a feeling of being screwed. But this was one call and I don't believe that this particular call screwed them all that much. And giving more attention to the call was sufficient for the coach despite the fact that it went against him in the end.
...

I beg to differ on this. My 9-to-5 job is 5 minutes from the Boo Williams Sportsplex, meaning I work and watch plenty of AAU ball. I am personal friends with the local AAU assignors, so I get to hear all the behind the scenes conversations concerning the coaches and officials, including when officials are at fault and when the coaches are at fault. And the national coorindator for AAU officials sits in that building every weekend during AAU season.

In a situation like yours, none of the powers that be would want another official questioning his partner based the reaction of an AAU coach. We go to our partners for one reason, to provide definite information. If I know a rule is being kicked, I will pull my partner away from the bench area and discuss it with him. But in the end, it will still be up to my partner to adjudicate as he sees fit.

In a college camp this past summer (during a high level AAU tournament) I had a play where I had the crew administer the throw-in at the wrong spot after my own inadvertent whistle. The most experienced official, by far, on the crew, tried to get me to change my mind but I was hard-headed. He didn't make a scene or extend the conversation, he just let me have my way. But, after the game he jumped in my a$$ and so did an off-duty observor who was watching the game.

Now, if your partner is too sensitive to handle post-game criticisms or critiques from you, in your capacity as an assignor, then maybe he is not somebody who should be getting games from you. But during the game, you are just an official, just like him.

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Several times you mentioned that you were the assigner -- that doesn't give you any extra rights / responsibilities during the game to go to your partner. I wonder if that "I'm the assigner" attitude doesn't carry over into other interactions with this official.

When you went to him, he said that control was gained in the FC. That can be done with one hand. No need to question him further.

You came here asking for advice, and you got it (some of which agreed with you and some of which didn't). Now you are not seeming to take it, and are just defending your position. It's like going to a camp -- take what works for you and ignore the rest.

The other official was wrong in how he communicated back to you later. You were wrong in how you handled it initially. Both imo, of course.

Bob, you failed to read where I explicitly addressed this. And now that you failed to read, you're now alleging a personal attack and being disrespectful. Your posts now have no more value. Additionally, just because you post something doesn't mean I should agree to it. I will consider it, just like how a coach argues for his team, but to kowtow to someone just because they offered me something is not prudent or a reflection of integrity.

I would hope you would retract this allegation that I'm being too "big-headed" so to speak.

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

I don't intend offense by this, but suspect you're going to take it anyway.

You posted a situation and asked for advice. You got it.
You didn't like that advice and argued with it.
You added information to the play to try to support your opinion that you didn't need the advice. That added information made it clearer to most of us here that you really really do need this advice.
You repeatedly didn't like the advice and argued with it.

Seriously - if you want advice, learn to accept advice.

And now the condescension begins. I gave my thanks to those who were respectful. To people like you who think I should just accept it without being challenged… you're no worse that the hard head people who can't take criticism.

For shame.

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by reffish

Your way of getting this done is coming off as condescending and self righteous, like you are the only one on the court that has all the right information, right philosophy (have pure integrity of the game), and ability to get all the calls right.

Ironically, you replied to the post where I encourage my partner to confer to me when I'm egregiously wrong or I kick a call. So this idea that I'm being self-righteous or condescending in being an advocate of conferring with one another is just another made up bullcrap to prove your own point.

Look at the video that AremRed posted last night where Tom Izzo's team gets screwed on a backcourt call. Are you really saying that the other refs should not have conferred with him about the call? Mind you these are professional officials who are supposed to be at the very best, and yet they get calls wrong too.

To suggest that because a guy is a newer official, I must "baby" him until he feels man enough before going up to him talking through a call is absolutely ridiculous. You guys must be the most sensitive bunch to absolutely work with if I can't come up to and ask or give something for you to consider.

Now I have mentioned many times in this thread that I will reevaluate my approach, and evidently, those of you who are adamant to continue criticizing me will continue to ignore it so what's the point really to say that. But as a man of principle, I will not prohibit myself from telling my partner what I have or ask whether he saw what I saw.

Everything else in your post beyond this though is merely a character assault to prove your own argument and merely an exercise of self-aggrandizement.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

And now the condescension begins. I gave my thanks to those who were respectful. To people like you who think I should just accept it without being challenged… you're no worse that the hard head people who can't take criticism.

For shame.

I do not think it is condescending to point out you asked for our advice here and you seem not not be willing to accept that advice. If you have it figured out already, then maybe you should have never posted the situation. Otherwise this is on you for posting this in the first place. But the situation sounds really bad on both fronts with what you did on the court and even what the email said in your direction. Both of you should have been adults about it and been more professional IMO. This would have been a better conversation after the game and in person. And the conversation should have gone something like this.

You: What did you see on that back court play?

Partner: I saw a player in the control in the FC by the player having possession of the ball.

You: Well it looked like to me he did not have control.

Partner: I saw the entire thing and he had control by.............and that is why I made the call.

Partner: OK, that is all I wanted to know.

If that was the conversation, you might have had a better interaction. But now you are trying to defend your actions and act as if he had no right to be upset with you. And that does not mean he was right either. It just means that he was put off by your actions and there was a better way to handle this and not stinking as much as both of you did.

Peace

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

To reffish's post, I would add that continued treatment of your fellow officials in the manner you seem to think is completely appropriate (even in the face of almost everyone else here, many of whom have FAR more experience than you, telling you repeatedly that you're wrong) is most likely going to generate a bunch of gunshy officials afraid to make any calls at all for fear of you rushing in to correct them. Not healthy.

This is getting absolutely ridiculous. I did not "repeatedly" tell him he was wrong. I just went up to him on one call and asked whether the player controlled the ball before going into the backcourt.

And who are you to deem what is healthy now? I love it when I go to a camp and get feedback from multiple officials. I love it when officials come to my games and come into the locker room and call me on calls I kick. I love it when my partner talks to me during the game and either comes up to me to save an obvious call or tells me honest feedback as we're working the game.

These type of posts are more condescending that what you're making me to be as you're imposing a belief on how officiating is supposed to be. No, you're absolutely wrong. And I hope you're man enough to accept this.

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think it is condescending to point out you asked for our advice here and you seem not not be willing to accept that advice. If you have it figured out already, then maybe you should have never posted the situation. Otherwise this is on you for posting this in the first place. But the situation sounds really bad on both fronts with what you did on the court and even what the email said in your direction. Both of you should have been adults about it and been more professional IMO. This would have been a better conversation after the game and in person. And the conversation should have gone something like this.

You: What did you see on that back court play?

Partner: I saw a player in the control in the FC by the player having possession of the ball.

You: Well it looked like to me he did not have control.

Partner: I saw the entire thing and he had control by.............and that is why I made the call.

Partner: OK, that is all I wanted to know.

If that was the conversation, you might have had a better interaction. But now you are trying to defend your actions and act as if he had no right to be upset with you. And that does not mean he was right either. It just means that he was put off by your actions and there was a better way to handle this and not stinking as much as both of you did.

Peace

JRutledge, I don't know what to say to you now. I explicitly stated that I accepted your particular advice and stated my appreciation for it. Asking for advice does not mean that I must then accept everything. And since this is a forum after all, I would have thought you all would have understood that by now that it is a place of discussion.

Secondly, as I have mentioned many many times in this thread, I apologized to the official for making him feel uncomfortable and I told him in my email that I will consider his feelings now that he doesn't like to be approached.

So this statement where you say this…

Originally Posted by JRutledge

But now you are trying to defend your actions and act as if he had no right to be upset with you.

… is absolutely false, as I apologized to him during the game, and in his emails I distinguished the rules from his personal preference in that I will leave him alone during the games now that I know that he's uncomfortable in having me approach him.

How are you from all of that reading that I'm defending my actions? Honestly, this is getting ridiculous.


I will appreciate advice if the people giving it are not being disingenuous and making stuff up to fit their own view of things. Is that too much to ask?

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by Adam

This. All of this.

Adam is playing the peer pressure game rather adding value to this discussion… what a shame.

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

In a situation like yours, none of the powers that be would want another official questioning his partner based the reaction of an AAU coach. We go to our partners for one reason, to provide definite information. If I know a rule is being kicked, I will pull my partner away from the bench area and discuss it with him. But in the end, it will still be up to my partner to adjudicate as he sees fit.

In a college camp this past summer (during a high level AAU tournament) I had a play where I had the crew administer the throw-in at the wrong spot after my own inadvertent whistle. The most experienced official, by far, on the crew, tried to get me to change my mind but I was hard-headed. He didn't make a scene or extend the conversation, he just let me have my way. But, after the game he jumped in my a$$ and so did an off-duty observor who was watching the game.

It wasn't solely on the basis of the coach's reaction. He reacted before I even got to my partner so really that was not at issue. I merely brought it up to say that instead of giving him a T, I told him that I would talk to my partner about it so he would calm down as I went up to my partner to fetch the ball.

After I talked to my partner, I didn't chew him out after the quarter was over. I in fact apologized to him as I've stated many many many times in this thread. Though it was a conditional apology, and because it was a conditional apology this official sought to invalidate the conditional by trying to prove my reasoning wrong with a lazy attempt at reading the rulebook.

As I said at the beginning I am not willing to cut a guy, or admonish a guy or be extreme in any way. I guess I'm more self-critical than most people where I should be giving myself credit for not being as rude like your partner and the observer who chewed you out on a kicked call.

I just wanted to know how you all used the opportunity to confer with your partner on a egregiously kicked call, like the one that AremRed posted earlier from a game with Tom Izzo. I would hope everyone here would be as willing as the officials in that game of conferring with the calling official and give the calling official to opportunity to correct his mistake to get the call right.

However, as I just experienced, there are many hard headed officials, and I'm not going to overrule my partner if he's too prideful to correct his mistake. I'll be willing to eat it and tell the coach that he should ask my partner if it's something that I can't defend.

But I'm not going to accept that because the official is young or inexperienced that I'm not going to go up to him and gently talk to him about the call in the most prudent way without making him feel rejected or ashamed on the spot.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

How are you from all of that reading that I'm defending my actions? Honestly, this is getting ridiculous.

Well you keep saying you apologized to him as if that made everything else right that you did before. That is my point to you. You were given advice as to what happened and instead of just saying "OK I can see that" or "Now I understand that point of view" you want to debate what you did as if he had no right to be upset with your initial questioning. And I said both of you handled this wrong in the long run. He could have responded initially better to you and not been as confrontational for sure. This was not all on you if you have been paying attention. Your actions just initiated the confrontation.

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

I will appreciate advice if the people giving it are not being disingenuous and making stuff up to fit their own view of things. Is that too much to ask?

I do not need to say anything to fit a point of view. You seem to already know what was best, so why come here and ask at all? If you have it figured out, then do you. Once again you came here with this situation, not me.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

...

The rule he is referencing is:

...I'm wondering how you guys apply this rule in your games?

Back to the original question.

In my games I only go to my partners if I am 100% sure they got a call wrong and I am providing information that I 100% know they didn't have in making their call.

If I know my partner is kicking a rule, I will go up to them and tell them something to the effect of "trust me, I know I'm right on this."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

Adam is playing the peer pressure game rather adding value to this discussion… what a shame.

No, that wasn't playing any game with peer pressure. It was simply adding my agreement to what Bob had already said succinctly.

I'll address some more specifics later, but for now I have to get back to work.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

This is getting absolutely ridiculous. I did not "repeatedly" tell him he was wrong.

Nor did I say such a thing. Reading is fundamental.

And with that I'm done.

[OKREF]

Could you please tell me why any lead would be in the C position, while working two man mechanics? This seems that you didn't trust your partner to be able to officiate his area. I would probably be upset also. Once again, while your watching the inbounds play at half court, who is watching your primary?