I'm not saying that the T/C shouldn't have a primary whistle, but it depends on the kind of contact -- if it's from behind or on the head, I would expect the C to get it even in the L's half of the lane. I don't guess through players and I have two other officials on the floor.

The point I was trying to make is this -- they're way too close to an overlapping coverage area to jump in with "that's why you don't call across the lane." It just sounds like an incorrect or an overly picky use of a catchphrase. Matter of fact, I've never once heard that phrase used till this thread on a play actually occurring in the paint.

BTW, in our pregames: "In the paint, the L is king." With the knowledge that we're not reaching and guessing no matter where. Why? Because I don't see an invisible line drawn down the center of the lane and I can *see* the paint.

This is in the paint. I would call a foul from the L if I saw something that suggested it was a foul. I not only understand there is going to be contact on these type of plays, I expect it. I would expect more of a call from a C or the T in this case because they likely have a clean look at the block from the angle. I have no problem with the L making this call and I would not suggest they are the only one to make this kind of call in a boys game. And when you have a 7 footer, then you really have to be careful to just call something without some real displacement or if they get to the ball first up top.

Peace

A good friend has said what, to me, makes the most sense -- the dividing line needs to be somewhere and by putting it in the middle of the lane lets both the L and the C know that they have lane responsibility. And not to nitpick which side of the lane the play's on.

Up that high? I'm likely screened by the rim or the backboard or something else -- it's why I have a T/C. But if I see a foul, I'm getting it.

Meant to add, especially when it's across the paint. I don't like looking through the backboard for fouls.

Exactly. C has a perfect look at every element of this play: body, arms, lift, etc. You gotta know what you can't see at each position, trust your partners, and don't guess.

But that has nothing to do with the players' position on the floor and everything to do with the relative position of the offensive and defensive players. Outside officials need to be willing to come in if needed and leads need to know that sometimes that C/T has a better look and it's better to not guess.

This equation changes a bit in a 2-person game.

Falling a few points was to be exspected. Falling 15-20 points shows who you were getting the majority of your ratings from. Many of these older gentleman were living off the over-inflated assistance from there peers. Now that they have been in the tournament system for so long it probably doesn't even matter.

Agreed and that's what I meant when I originally posted about this being a good example of when not to call across the paint.

I understand Rich's point about this play being in the middle of the lane and something the L can come get if he needs to. But the stuff up top should be left to the outside guys. If there is body contact that needs to be called then the L may certainly have a look at it but that's not the case here. We don't no exactly what the L called here but it really doesnt matter b/c its clearly not a foul any way we look at it.

It's funny -- I had a couple of fouls in a previous game where I, as the lead, had nothing....but the trail/center came in and got something up high, from behind.

I won't lie -- I spent quite a bit of time replaying these plays in my head wondering if I could've been in a better spot, looking in a better place. In the end, I realized what you said -- some fouls just belong to the outside guys.

In 2-person, we work deeper on the end line to try to get some of these angles we need to get cause we don't have the same level of help outside. In 3-person, this just isn't necessary or even desirable.

The point I was trying to hammer home is that we cannot let a mechanics manual and primary areas define how we officiate plays. There's a reason we have secondary areas. And when someone takes it to the rack, we all need to have good position in case something happens that only we can see. And then trust our partners and don't guess.

I hear you, but I just do not see it translating in actual assignments. There are many other factors used as well. I know at least on the boys side other factors are used and ever region of the state has different standards based on where you are from and who is your "competition" for assignments. Heck in the last few years we had guys that hardly had any playoff experience and ended up at a place higher than those that had worked longer in the playoff system, but they were in a different area and they needed to find someone to fill those slots (rightfully so) and passed up guys like me. I knew the deal and was not mad at all. And all my ratings have been in the 90s for years. If it was about ratings, I would have been called for sure in the past. And right now I have maxed out in all my ratings and cannot go any further unless assigned a State Final. I just do not sit around and worry about what I cannot control and I cannot control what I am actually assigned.

Peace

Evidently, most posters have disagreed with the foul called and felt that the blocked shot was "clean". Additionally, most posters felt that the call was also made by either an incorrectly positioned "lead" or passed on by the T or C (whom should've had the best look). Given that observation--would you have had a side-bar convo with your crew (maybe after the game) to discuss this issue--perhaps inquiring exactly what the L saw that made it a legitimate foul? Or do you "let bygones be bygones"? Or do you just trust your crew that the call was properly made. As for me, we often post-game about "suspect calls"--I've been in post-game talks where an official thought he should have not made a call.