Flow vs. Rules
 

At last weekend's camp, I was praised by one instructor for a few off-ball calls. I appreciated the positive feedback, but it made me laugh at the same time.

One of the things that coaches' and fellow officials' evaluations dinged me on was that very thing -- "too many off ball calls" (partner) and "affects flow of the game" (coach). Granted, these were at the lowest end of the bell-shaped curve, and the instructor told me to heed none of it, but it makes you wonder how some people think.

I'm all for seeing a play through, especially the on-ball plays (contact affecting RSBQ, et al), but off-ball stuff happens that you have to deal with. I have to believe if some this "flow" garbage is "I want to get the game over with," whether the players are committing fouls or not. Do they expect us to ignore them, so they can get home earlier?

Chances are they didn't even see what happened that caused you to blow the whistle because they, like 99% of the people in the gym, are watching the player with the ball. And since the action you saw didn't get their attention, it must not have been significant enough to be called.

Like your clinician said - ignore that kind of comment and keep calling the off-ball fouls. That is what cleans up the game.

Off-ball fouls also have a pesky way of preventing dirty play/fights. Those they'll notice.

You're going to hear plenty of advice that should go in one ear and out the other. Ignoring off-ball fouls is one of them.

Coach - "They [off-ball foul calls] affect the flow of the game."
Me - "Coach... a foul is a foul. If you don't want them called, then tell your players not to commit them."

Probably not the wisest answer for many reasons.

It's Referee Bingo™: you keep crossing things off the board until you get to give a technical!

Oh, I wouldn't say that... just think it. My actual reaction would probably be something like "a foul is a foul, regardless of where it's committed."

Even that is not really that accurate.

Random Initial Thoughts
 

A. Games that flow and necessary of ball fouls called need not be mutually exclusive.

B. Games experienced and studied on video that seemed to get out of control most frequently had ballwatching Officials who, with no clue of off ball primary surveillance principles, missed calls off ball that were the initial seeds of the rough play that cropped up later.

C. Those who complain about off ball fouls aren't looking where you are paid to look. But they will complain more if, by ignoring those calls, you thereby let the game get out of control.

Just some initial random thoughts on the OP...

Right Above The Battleship ...
 

Rookie officials, and some experienced officials, as well as all coaches, and all fans, need to have this tattooed on their chests.

You know what hurts the flow even more? Not calling off ball stuff.

Please elaborate.

Contact is situational. The very same contact may or may not be a foul depending on the game situation.

I'm clearly not referring to whether or not contact in Case A is the same as contact in Case B, and whether or not it's a foul.

If a player fouls another player (not saying similar contact, but an actual foul), then it doesn't matter where it occurs... relative to the position of the ball.

The problem is, "a foul is a foul..." is really a meaningless statement. It's a truism. Most of us know what you mean, but I wouldn't use it with a coach, because too many of them will hear "contact is a foul...."

I'm pretty sure a coach would know that there is legal contact in a basketball game, so they wouldn't need me to dumb it down like that.

But thanks for looking out.

Let me say it another way, 99% of the time I see it used, it's used as a sort of rebuttal against advantage/disadvantage concepts. As in, "You can't apply advantage, because a foul is a foul."

When I hear it from coaches, it's after I let incidental contact go uncalled. Maybe your experience is different, though. We're just explaining why some officials around here flinch when we hear the phrase.

Okay. So how would you react to a coach, or anybody else, that doesn't like off-ball foul calls?

And I don't mean that in a snarky way. I'm honestly asking how you'd phrase it.

Honestly I don't concern myself. It's not a conversation I'm going to have.

Me either.

Honest answer, the same way I react to a coach who starts whining for 3 seconds while the shots keep going up: I quietly recognize he isn't going to have much positive to offer in this game and adjust my internal expectations. If his comments become a distraction, or unsporting, I'll shut it down.

In the course of this game, I wouldn't bother addressing it other than shutting it down if it becomes necessary. If it's in a general discussion among friends (I have friends who coach) off the court, that's different.

If it's a cordial discussion during a break in action and he says something about the flow, I might simply respond that in my opinion, the flow of a game gets disrupted more by uncalled off-ball fouls. But this discussion would only happen with a coach who has already built a good rapport with me: and that's just not the sort of coach who would make such a complaint.

To answer the question: "Coach, I thought that foul needed to be called." Likely more than they're going to get, but it's not less.

"Coach, it was a foul"

Flow of the game?
 

I never complain about the "flow of the game". But, i do get upset when officials miss guys getting held trying to come off screens, or when guys are setting illegal screens off the ball. So, kudos to you for getting that.

I'm on the side of screw the flow, get it right.

Officials do not dictate the "flow" of the game. Players dictated the "flow" of the game.

MTD, Sr.

Depends on whose perspective you are looking from.

Players dictate the flow by the amount of illegal activity they choose to engage in.

Depends on whose perspective you are looking from.

Guess you need to decide whose perspective you are concerned with when discussing officiating and illegal contact.

When you figure that out you may be able to advance this conversation past 'cut & paste'.

Are you stuttering?

As an official, I hope it's the official's perspective you're concerned with. Otherwise, there are coaching forums all over the place where you may get a response more to your liking.

True, and it makes those statements undertstandable when they come from coaches and fans.

Would anybody dare say that an official that says it could be a ball-watcher?

Coaches, players, and fans perspectives do not count matter. And if an evaluator would have told me that he was concerned about the flow of the game I would have told him to stop evaluating and become a fan.

MTD, Sr.

BNF:

I will put your check in the mail tomorrow morning. ;)

MTD, Sr.

Maybe it's a good thing I haven't had a coach complain about off-ball calls.

I'm not talking about fans, players, or coaches perspectives as most of you assumed. There are different perspectives on officiating and who does what even within our own community! Strange, I know. A HS-only state finals official told me he lets the players play for a few minutes before he steps in to set the bar for what will be allowed in the game. On the other hand a D1 guy told me in his mind his job to set the tone and the flow of the game -- the way he calls the first few minutes outlines how the game will flow.

It's two sides of the same coin. Both are valid reasons. It just depends how you look at it. It would be nice to hear some actual discussion on this topic instead of just being glib and rejecting my premise because you think it's what coaches or players think.

Perhaps if you weren't glib in your original (duplicate) duplicate posts, we'd take you more seriously.

I could say the same about BNR repeating the same thing MTD said to me. But it's ok. I think I've demonstrated that there are at least two sides to this coin -- who sets the "flow" for the game does depend on whose perspective you are looking from.

The players always set the flow of the game in my games. And as officials we should never fall into the trap of believing that anybody else except players set the flow of the game.

MTD, Sr.

But certainly how we call the game from the beginning also has an effect on the flow?

I didn't even know MTD has posted anything. But it's amazing how 2 veteran officials, who live nowhere near each other, and never travelled in the same officiating circles could come up with almost identical statements on the subject.

I choose not to be an official who believes it is his job to dictate the flow of the game.

Great minds think alike! :D

MTD, Sr.


P.S. Oh it is possible that through Six Degrees of Separation we might have a connection. And I did put your check in the mail this morning. :p

Make it 3. I just call the game that's in front of me.

I have heard very few supervisors or clinicians talk about flow anymore. The new rules or past guidelines have helped eliminate that part of the discussion.

Peace

I would say that it is more how the players and coaches adjust to the officials calling the game, that dictate the flow.