Can Refs Help Improve Youth Play (Videos)

[ccrroo]

Thanks - I'm already learning something new. What are the 4 absolutes on a ball dribbler? It would help if I knew that.

Honestly, I'm absolutely amazed that a defender can smack a dribbler across the chest and it not be a foul (video 2). We haven't taught that but maybe we certainly will start. No more trying to get into good position.

What I'm reading is that in video 1 the offense has all the rights to his space. And in video 2, the offense doesn't have rights to his space.

I definitely have to send my parents to this thread because they would all say that video 2 is a foul. And if it's not, we are teaching our kids the wrong way and they are giving their kids the wrong feedback.

I see these same officials doing HS games.

No comment on video 1? Or too close to speculate and let it stand as called?

[APG]

Originally Posted by ccrroo

Thanks - I'm already learning something new. What are the 4 absolutes on a ball dribbler? It would help if I knew that.

Honestly, I'm absolutely amazed that a defender can smack a dribbler across the chest and it not be a foul (video 2). We haven't taught that but maybe we certainly will start. No more trying to get into good position.

What I'm reading is that in video 1 the offense has all the rights to his space. And in video 2, the offense doesn't have rights to his space.

I definitely have to send my parents to this thread because they would all say that video 2 is a foul. And if it's not, we are teaching our kids the wrong way and they are giving their kids the wrong feedback.

I see these same officials doing HS games.

No comment on video 1? Or too close to speculate and let it stand as called?

Smack is a bit dramatic...I've seen this type of play before and seen a dribbler disregard it as if the defender wasn't there. Guess my main point is that that type of play isn't an automatic foul. I still wouldn't teach your players to do what this defender did cause 1.) he's in poor position if he doesn't come up with a steal...and 2.) he puts himself at a greater chance of picking up a foul.

As to the four absolutes, strictly speaking, this type of contact is illegal on the ballhandler/dribbler:

1.) Two hands on the ball handler
2.) An extended forearm
3.) Repeating (more than once) touching with the same hand or either hand
3.) A stayed (continuous) touch on the ball handler

[Adam]

Video 1: The official has a much better angle than the camera. There are two options from what I can see.

1. The defender leaned into the path as the dribbler was about to go around him.
2. The official holds to the myth that a player must be "set" to draw a charge.

I'd say the odds of both are about 50/50 given the video I'm watching.

Video 2.
The dribbler is barely phased by this, so it's generally a good no-call. From the camera angle, I can't even tell if contact is made. If there's no contact, there's no foul. If there's contact, but the dribbler isn't affected, there's no foul.

[Adam]

Video 3. Ref just missed it. It happens.

Video 4. I see what the ref saw. First defender is not likely getting a foul called.

Video 5. First defender: I see a lot of ball, hardly any contact between players. The contact that starts to trip the ball handler is made on the feet, after the defender has gained his position. That's rarely a foul on a defender. Second defender, there's some contact, but it looks like it was simply missed. There's not a lot of affect on your player with this second defender (although at that level, it's something I'd call if I see it), so th official may have passed since your player kept the ball.

[Adam]

I'd like to ask the OP a question.

Why would you want a foul called in that second video? Was your player at all disadvantaged by the contact (assuming there was any contact at all)? I would think, as a coach, you'd much rather have a defender out of position while your dribbler keeps going past him.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'd like to ask the OP a question.

Why would you want a foul called in that second video? Was your player at all disadvantaged by the contact (assuming there was any contact at all)? I would think, as a coach, you'd much rather have a defender out of position while your dribbler keeps going past him.

Not that I neccesarly disagree with the lack of a foul call, but many coaches would prefer having a player in foul trouble/possibly taken out of the game rather than the possible immediate advantage gained on the play.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by APG

Not that I neccesarly disagree with the lack of a foul call, but many coaches would prefer having a player in foul trouble/possibly taken out of the game rather than the possible immediate advantage gained on the play.

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).

[ccrroo]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'd like to ask the OP a question.

Why would you want a foul called in that second video? Was your player at all disadvantaged by the contact (assuming there was any contact at all)? I would think, as a coach, you'd much rather have a defender out of position while your dribbler keeps going past him.

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.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by ccrroo

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.

[ccrroo]

Originally Posted by Rich

The strength of the dribbler is considered when adv/disadv is applied.

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by ccrroo

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.

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.

[JRutledge]

I officiate for me. I leave my house because I like where I am going and what I am working. I am not here to teach anyone anything but other officials, if they are receptive to my knowledge and experience. It is the coach's job to teach kids how to play and to train kids. My job is to call the game properly and use proper judgment. Middle school games are hard to work because the talent and fluidity of the players is not yet developed.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ccrroo

...
Honestly, I'm absolutely amazed that a defender can smack a dribbler across the chest and it not be a foul (video 2)...

If I heard this extreme hyperbole from a coach after that play, I would cease answering any further questions from that coach the rest of the game, because he could no longer be trusted to have an honest conversation.

[Rich1]

Contact is not a foul unless it is judged to e illegal. In short, contact is illegal and should be dalled a foul if it "hinders normal defensive and offensive movements". The refs may see the exact same contact tat you see but view it differently. If your team is "playing through contact" refs may choose to let it go.

For reference, the following places in the rule book may help: 4-7, 4-18, 4-19, 4-23, 4-24, 4-26, 4-27, 4-37, 4-40, 4-45, and 10-6.

Refs are required to make quick judgements involving contact all game long and depending on your angle, focus, perspective, experience, bias, and other factors you may disagree. Complaining from coaches, players, parents isn't going to change what we call. The best thing you can do as a coach is teach your players to adjust to how the crew is calling the game.

[Rich1]

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.