Foul or good block? (Video)

[j51969]

Originally Posted by johnny d

And in Illinois, this means exactly what? Certainly not the best officials the state has to offer. Many of the guys working the state tournament here are doing so as lifetime achievement awards. That is usually why they are 5+ years past their prime, can no longer run, and are 25+ pounds over weight.

Don't forget that there ratings were riding in the mid 90's when we could rate one another. I know some officials whose ratings went down in the low 70's, as soon as, the coaches rating became the only metric. That tells you something.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by j51969

Don't forget that there ratings were riding in the mid 90's when we could rate one another. I know some officials whose ratings went down in the low 70's, as soon as, the coaches rating became the only metric. That tells you something.

All that tells you is that different officials are better at brown nosing coaches than others. There will be some who's ratings do reflect actual ability. However, some coach's ratings, while you'd like to think reflect true ability, do no such thing. It creates a conflict of interest in that it provides an incentive for officials to make decisions based on ratings. Some officials do that and get better ratings while officials that are not afraid to take care of business may get lower ratings.

Officials ratings are also not necessarily any more accurate.

But, when you combine the two in the appropriate ratio, the anomalies of one are somewhat canceled out by the anomalies of the other.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

All that tells you is that different officials are better at brown nosing coaches than others. There will be some who's ratings do reflect actual ability. However, some coach's ratings, while you'd like to think reflect true ability, do no such thing. It creates a conflict of interest in that it provides an incentive for officials to make decisions based on ratings. Some officials do that and get better ratings while officials that are not afraid to take care of business may get lower ratings.

Officials ratings are also not necessarily any more accurate.

But, when you combine the two in the appropriate ratio, the anomalies of one are somewhat canceled out by the anomalies of the other.

And it did not matter. Ratings did not determine your assignments here. It was a very small percentage of the consideration. We have an overall Power Rating that the top score is 40 and and coaches ratings only factor into 5 points of that number. Basically an official that has never worked a State Finals, will never have a 40 until they work a State Finals. And even then that is not a guarantee.

The bottom line people worry too much about coach's ratings. I have never cared about those ratings and I am doing just fine in playoff assignments. There is so much that is considered than ratings people just do not like to admit that is a fact around here.

Peace

[jeremy341a]

While I don't believe the call to be correct, I don't really believe he is calling "across the lane." The defender leaves the floor partially in his primary. The farthest either player is from his primary when the play begins is perhaps a couple of feet. The both land in his primary. The play is near him with not a terrible angle, although it would have been better had he not pinched. He anticipated and made a bad call but I think it's a stretch to say he shouldn't have the option of having a whistle here.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by j51969

Don't forget that there ratings were riding in the mid 90's when we could rate one another. I know some officials whose ratings went down in the low 70's, as soon as, the coaches rating became the only metric. That tells you something.

Ratings were changed because you had a complete drop off in the overall numbers of ratings. Heck I went from 98 percentile in both levels and feel 5 or 6 percentile points when officials stopped rating. The more ratings you have regardless of the type of rating, the better you will be percentile wise.

Peace

[j51969]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Ratings were changed because you had a complete drop off in the overall numbers of ratings. Heck I went from 98 percentile in both levels and feel 5 or 6 percentile points when officials stopped rating. The more ratings you have regardless of the type of rating, the better you will be percentile wise.

Peace

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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by j51969

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.

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

[Kansas Ref]

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.