Can Refs Help Improve Youth Play (Videos)

[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

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.

There's a rule here that we have to consider when reffing, and you may not be aware of. Essentially, it states that any contact which does not hinder normal offensive or defensive movements is to be ruled "incidental" and not a foul. That's what Rich meant by his comment. Stronger dribblers will simply be able to play through more contact than weaker dribblers.

We don't have to spend any time watching them or gauging their relative strengths, we simply watch the results of the play.

[ccrroo]

Originally Posted by Adam

There's a rule here that we have to consider when reffing, and you may not be aware of. Essentially, it states that any contact which does not hinder normal offensive or defensive movements is to be ruled "incidental" and not a foul. That's what Rich meant by his comment. Stronger dribblers will simply be able to play through more contact than weaker dribblers.

We don't have to spend any time watching them or gauging their relative strengths, we simply watch the results of the play.

Thanks Adam, that does help.

[ccrroo]

So I'll give it another shot of why I want vid 2 called. (and yes, I missed the obvious ones about foul trouble and foul shots - thanks guys)

I'm learning it's wrong, but that defensive player in vid 2 made contact with the dribbler as he was trying to steal the ball. Whether he got the ball or not, he made contact trying to steal the ball.

I'll probably regret saying this, but I'm pretty sure I've seen many, many examples where contact is made away from the ball with absolutely no bearing on the play and yet a foul is called. It feels inconsistent and random at best.

[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.