Difficult partners (long post... Sorry)
 

So I was working a decent tourney this past weekend. Worked in a crew with 2 guys I've never worked with before for 6 games. Had two situations and would like feedback on how to better approach next time...

1st 2 games don't have any issues. I can see we have slightly different interpretations of the new contact rules (one, our R, wants to still give a warning for hands when we have been told not to give warnings) but nothing big until 3rd game. It's a GV game. Some minor differences as a crew in fouls the first half. At halftime our R calls me out for "soft fouls" on and and ones due to new contact rules. I have not had any and ones due to contact rules to this point in the day, let alone that game. He says we need to have a patient whistle and give them a warning before calling the foul. At this point I call him out and say I haven't had any fouls like that AND we are not to give warnings this year. The rules are clear and our chapter has been clear. I calm down and "agree" as I am the only one in the crew that's calling as we have been directed. Second half of the game was crap on my part because I feel I changed how I was calling the game and not for the better. Talked to some other officials who were in the locker room at half and heard our "conversation". They were more on my side of the new rule interpretation and didn't understand why he was calling me out when he had the "soft fouls and ones."

In our last game (3rd game of day 2) I gave a coach a fairly easy tech. He was out past mid court yelling at me about a call I had just made. I called the T and reported both. I then turned around and told my partners that #xx had one shot for the foul on the shot and then we would have 2 shots for the t. I went opposite. We had pregamed to get together with the closest official when we give a t but this situation didn't warrant as it was all one motion really. The issue came when my partner came to me after we shot the free throws and wanted to know why the coach got the T. I told him and then he proceeded to tell me how I needed to follow protocol. I said "you asked what the T was for and I told you. Don't talk to me about protocol now as we are getting ready to in bound the ball." He said "no we are going to talk about this now." I basically no we aren't, now you can talk to the coach or I will but we are moving forward with the game. No discussions after the game (I believe bc we were both ready to be done and neither wanted to talk)

Second day I basically decided to have a get in, get done, get out kind of day.

I can sympathize, but I don't think I can advise on how to handle things better. I would have likely handled things the same as you. In neither sitch was that the time or the place for your partners to have that conversation. Halftime, if R wants to bring up the disparity in application of the new rule, that's fine. We need to talk and make sure we are on the same page. The problem is for most of us that is not really a new rule. I can tell you the exact way it is written is what has been stressed as "need to call these" in rules meetings here for the last two years. The same guys who didn't want to call those fouls before are not going to want to call them now. I would have stuck to my guns just like you did.

I am a pretty literal guy, if our state supervisor says "hey call the game like this" I will step in line. I've had plenty of rubs like the ones you describe. Sometimes GIGDGO is all you can do. Sorry no great advice, I feel like you handled the situation fine.

Apparently, the situation *did* warrant it. At least as I read it.

"Because I gave it to him." :cool:

The bold section would have been the time to address the hand check rule issues. Put it this way: if you have information about something regarding a foul are you going to wait until you're in the locker room to tell your partner(s)?

I thought not :rolleyes:

Don't keep issues to yourself. Get them before they become big issues because you know when they become big issues it won't be during a 40-point blowout.

Couple thoughts:

1. your problems could also be a result of calling 6 games with the same crew.

2. From the way you describe things perhaps the R and the other guy are sitting on some other forum writing the same "Difficult Partner" stuff about you. You said you had to 'calm down' -- crew disputes always need to be handled calmly and tactfully, especially if you are working with people you don't know very well. Even if you are 'right' in the way you are calling things, sometimes you need to defer to the assigned R. He's the assigned crew chief (presumably, you didn't give much background) and the crew needs to march to the beat of his drum. If you have problems with the way he wants things done then report him after the game.

3. Probably not a smart idea to talk to some "other officials" at the site about your partner problems. Find one or two guys you trust and talk to them, or post here on The Forum™. :)

4. If you pregamed to get together with the nearest official after a tech and don't do it you can't get mad if your partner calls you out on it. Still wasn't the right time or place to call you out though.

I am really afraid we are going to have the same issue in our association with the old timers as you describe: them continuing to not call hand checks and not wanting to change. I think the rule change is great for the game.

The secondary problem I see happening is that me calling them and the other two partners not calling them makes the crew look bad. I am hoping though that the coaches recognize who is right and it won't hurt in the long run. Hopefully they will get after officials who arent calling it, since they have likely spent a lot of time couaching thier kids on it.

I also have high hopes that our new varsity assigner will get people to do it or show em the highway. I really hope it improves our games.

Thanks for feedback. Reflection wise I probably should have handled the T the way we discussed. No excuse on that. Was looking more for how/when he approached me.

The comments to "other" officials in the room were made in reference to two that approached me. I did talk to a trusted official on the drive home from tourney. :)

I'm not sure what part of Texas you're from, or which chapter you're in, but your one side of the story doesn't make it seem like you may have been the best partner to work with either. Maybe things happened exactly as you described, but it just comes off sounding like a young, inexperienced complainer. Talk to your assigner if you really think this guy was not following the protocol you were expected to follow. In my chapter, crew chiefs aren't assigned blindly.

No, to me it sounds like some older guys who are going to keep on calling the game the way they always have. Give a warning on contact on the ball-handler?

Above, I see a post that says that the R is the boss. No, that's not the case everywhere. Here, the R is simply the person who does the book and (usually) tosses the ball up and administers the throw-in at the start of quarters. The R can't tell a U how to work a game any more than a U can tell an R how to work a game. Most nights, the R is the guy who hadn't been the R in the crew's previous games.

Perhaps the newer officials are better positioned to deal with such a change, although I'm working hard to make sure I'm fully on board. I remember back to the first year of the 3-point shot -- older officials were not trained to look at the feet on a jump shot, but this new guy never had a problem with that.

I'd prefer to hear the other side of the story before giving this guy the benefit of the doubt. Maybe the R was a jerk. I've had different partners who suggested not calling it automatically. I do anyway. The fact that the OP said the R called him out for ticky tack "and ones" is curious - especially since he claims he didn't call any at all. Something doesn't add up.

Well, he's not a newbie -- he's been a member here for 10 years.

Ticky-tack "and ones" have nothing to do with the new rule, anyway. I'm not sure why that was brought up. And there are a lot of ticky-tack "and ones" in my opinion, but that's a whole 'nother thread.

*Excuse me, but exactly what are "ones" you referring to? What is a "one" ?
I'm not familiar with that jargon

I assumed he meant fouls on the shooter who makes the shot . . . and ges one free throw.

He meant "And one's" but he didn't type it very well

So let's say you could hear the other side of the story...what then? This guy is automatically dismissed? That makes lots of sense.

For Texref - the best way I have found to deal with these types of situations/partners is to acknowledge them on the court with a simple "OK. Got it partner" and then walk away. In the locker room you can have a discussion with them, generally fueled by asking questions. "Partner, I am really confused about..." or "Partner, I didn't really understand xyz. Could you explain that to me?"

A) Not likely to hear the other side... and B) giving the benefit of the doubt here is appropriate in that he's been here forever and has proven himself to not be a knucklehead already.

I don't know. That's kind of the point of hearing the other side - to make a more educated judgment. :rolleyes:

I just happen to find these types of posts kind of silly. And I work in Texas where I know how these kinds of things go from being in locker rooms during tourney time. I'm pretty sure he doesn't work in my chapter, though, because he would be smart enough to take it to the assignor if he did.

Roll your eyes all you want... insisting on hearing both sides of the story before making any comment at all would render this forum (heck ... almost ANY forum) useless. Yeah, it'd be great to hear the other side. But it shouldn't be REQUIRED to hear both sides on a forum such as this - else we'll pretty much be stuck having no conversation at all.

Roll Eyes.

Pissing and moaning about partners is great fun - especially when you do it anonymously in a public forum. I'm not saying anything is required - you're being silly now. I'm just saying that I have doubts about what really went down based on the way the OP was presented. And if people didn't debate on Forums, that wouldn't be much fun either, would it?

I semi-mentor someone who works is in an association for which I have I no respect. I tell him that he cannot worry about what his various partners are doing, and that he cannot allow himself to adjust to their less than learned philosophies of officiating. Do what you know is right, and keep conversation to a minimum when it is clear they have no interest in intellectual and/or candid discussions on officiating.

You can search my 9000+ posts, and with the possible exception of one correctable error situation I had years ago, you won't find me concerned with what my partners were or were not doing.

It may have not gone down exactly like that, but elements of it ring very true. One of my commissioners has already sent out an email about veterans who insist they are not going to change how they call it.

You need to make an educated judgement on a guy asking for ways to deal with difficult partners??? Who cares if it went exactly as he said or not - he was asking for advice on how to handle things better.

[QUOTE=BadNewsRef;945300]I semi-mentor someone who works is in an association for which I have I no respect. I tell him that he cannot worry about what his various partners are doing, and that he cannot allow himself to adjust to their less than learned philosophies of officiating. Do what you know is right, and keep conversation to a minimum when it is clear they have no interest in intellectual and/or candid discussions on officiating.

The problem (if you choose to stay in that Association for what you believe are valid reasons) is that your partners do have an impact on how you are perceived and or evaluated... I also suspect that it has a (perhaps unconscious) effect on your officiating.

What would I do differently?...In addition to NOT SAYING what I've highlighted above, I would simply respond: "OK...what would you like to talk about?" (I would try to hide my sarcasm)

Good communication is making sure that a message is sent, received, and understood. Seems to me that he didn't understand what you were saying (otherwise, why would he need to "talk about it now"?). When he tells you why he wants to talk about it - then you'll know how to respond. Shutting him down w/ the "Don't talk to me about protocol...." is only going to make him more upset than he already is. What seems obvious to you, may not be to others.....

Just my $.02 worth...

Someone piss in your wheaties this morning Smitty?? I asked a question about to handle the situation better next time. This forum is to help us get better at this avocation is it not? I wasn't pissing and moaning about my partners, rather asking how to handle the situation better next time. The story is my side of the weekend and as has been pointed out, they may very well be doing the same thing elsewhere that I'm doing here. No sure why you are attacking me for asking a question?

New partners
 

Anytime I work with new partners, I get as much info about them before the game and try to have a more detailed pre-game if possible. I usually ask them if they have worked with anyone I know. I cover how and when we will consult on the court in case of conflicting calls (Blarge). I have called a block on a defender and my partner actually took a charge to the table after I reported my foul. The main thing is to keep your wits about you and consentrate on calling your game. The R is by rule the guy that rules on matters not covered in the rules and usually will take a lead role in game admin. I always follow the R's lead. If I have problems the assigner will get a call and an email ASAP.

And I offered my suggestion: talk to your assignor about it. Did you do that? If so, what was his response? In Texas, there are very big associations and very small ones. If it's a big association, perhaps the assignor is unaware of this person trying to undermine what the group as a whole is trying to educate its members to do regarding the freedom of movement rules. If you don't bring it to the attention of the people who are trying to get everyone on the same page, then you aren't helping the next guy who will go through the same thing. You already addressed the T situation - it's pretty much a common expectation around here to get with one partner before going to the table with a T. That way nothing in the administration is likely to get missed - especially since you had a foul just prior to the T.

80% of his partners are horrible. They have no interest in getting better, no interest in discussing plays, no interest in any to do with officiating beyond getting their pay checks. He doesn't have the flexibility to travel an hour out of town to work like I do.

But he's been to the State Tourney Eval Camp and has been selected to work the state tournament. If he focused on what his various partners are doing it would hold back his development.

Who said I haven't talked to my assignor? Can I not still ask for different ways? Talking to my assignor gives me feedback but it will not help the situation as we are all from different associations. I appreciate your feedback but not the way you attacked me for asking a question.