On #2, it's frustrating that it's a foul if the ball comes out and otherwise it's not. When the defense is constantly doing that move, it impacts how the offense attacks. They have to be much more guarded. It affects the entire game.
Also, if the outcome matters on whether something is a foul, than video 1 should be a no call because the offense isn't going to make that out of control shot.

Realize the camera angle is no good, but in video 2 there was contact. I was directly across from the play. At the age and ability, I don't see how a kid makes that move without contact.

Those who can't ref, teach!
 

Refs get paid to officiate rules, coaches get paid to teach the game. This is my mantra for sanctioned school games and I say this as someone who is both a ref and a coach. I don't want you telling my players what to do or how to adjust -- that's on me.

However, for rec leagues where you are dealing with parent coaches and younger kids it is ok to help kids understand what they are doing wrong but I still avoid too much coaching.

I also feel excessive ref coaching slows down the game and can make you appear biased if you spend more time "helping" one team over the other. It really isn't why we're there.

I would like to think that I would blow the whistle twice and the players would learn to stop making that move. That's probably wrong (per the rules) and naive. And no one would ever want to work with me.

One needs to realize that the simple fact that there is contact does not mean there's a foul. Basketball is a contact sport. Save for some very specific situations (and depending on the rule set), contact by either team has to place the opponent at some sort of disadvantage/some sort of advantage has to be gained by the offending team.

Your extrapolation to the first video wouldn't hold up. If one rules the contact a charge (and it probably was), it's justified because the player taking the charge has been disadvantaged because he can not participate in normal defensive movements because he was knocked to the floor. If one was the rule a block, it would be justified (as far as calling it illegal contact) because the contact clearly affected the shot.


Again, contact in of itself is not a foul. Did the contact by the defense cause a disadvantage for the dribbler? On these types of plays, the calling official would be looking for the rhythm, speed, balance, or quickness of the offensive player being affected. It's not clear that either of those were affected.

That's really why I started this thread. It's sloppy 7th grade basketball exacerbated by lots of what looks like illegal contact. If the illegal contact were reduced, we would get less sloppy basketball.

I'm the assistant coach so parents may not come to me about our coaching ability or playing time. But I don't think they have approached the head coach. They did come to me today and commented on why so many fouls weren't being called. I told them that I was getting feedback that they weren't fouls. So we are all learning.

I also told them we are significantly de-emphasizing the charge. And emphasizing the style of play we've been seeing. Less emphasis on moving feet and more emphasis on going for the ball.

In video 1, we have a 7th grade kid that is trying to maintain his position against an offensive player that is out of control. He his punished (rightfully so).
In the videos 2-5, we have defenders creating contact with the offense in attempt to get the ball. And they are rewarded.
That's the perfect formula for sloppy 7th grade basketball.
And that's what we should teach.

What part is hyperbole? Ok, maybe "absolutely amazed" is. But the defender did hit the dribblers chest. Now the offense has to change their game for the rest of the game to be on guard for this. It didn't affect that play, but it affects all others.

Let's focus on 2. How exactly is the defender rewarded?

You really don't understand what a properly officiated play involves. It's not a mechanism to teach kids the right way or wrong way to play defense. If there's contact...if the ball comes out...it's a foul. If RSBQ is affected, it's a foul. Your player is protected against disadvantage.

Great comment, Adam. There was certainly contact. I was right across from it. And I haven't see any 7th graders in our league that can avoid contact with that move.
I would like it called so its stopped for the remainder of the game. Sure the dribbler played through it. But the ref just established that it won't be called, and now the dribbler has to change his game to protect against it. The dribbler is effectively less effective because he's on guard to protect the ball from illegal contact that isn't being called. Also, not all dribblers are strong enough to dribble through that and the defense is encouraged to go after others.

No, he doesnt. It will be called if there's a disadvantage. The strength of the dribbler is considered when adv/disadv is applied.

You seem to have trouble with this concept, but what the defender did in #2 was not illegal, not a foul. If I was evaluating an official who called that, I'd consider it an incorrect call.

I sincerely get that I don't understand what properly officiated play involves. I'm trying to learn and if I seem sarcastic at times, I apologize. I understand that officiating is a hard job and I'm attacking a job that you guys take great pride in doing.

The defender is rewarded in vid 2 becomes he makes the dribbler change his game to protect against his style of defense. Which I think it illegal (regardless off whether the ball came out). I'm learning that I'm long way from understanding what's illegal and what isn't

Remember the title of this thread. Can refs help improve youth play. I think most are saying no. I understand. Disappointed but understand.

This one made me pause. I'm certainly going to have to give this some thought. I'm pretty sure I didn't know that refs also had to rate the strength of the player. That certainly complicates it.

And some would love the free throws that come with the bonus fouls.

Those aren't considerations, though, when making the determination of whether contact is a foul (as you know).

Why does the dribbler have to change his game? Coach to the dribbler to keep doing what he's doing...what the defender is doing is a risky move and more often than not, he's either going to pick up a foul or he's gonna get blown by and put himself and the rest of their team in poor position to continue playing defense.

This is not a consideration for determining a foul.

The ref established no such thing. He's only established that it wasn't a foul on this play, because your dribbler wasn't affected. If a turnover had been caused, and he didn't call it, then you'd have a valid complaint, IMO.

If a dribbler isn't strong enough to go through that, then the defender will find his foul count has gone up.

Teaching them to dribble through contact is, to put it perhaps a little too bluntly, your job.