Can Refs Help Improve Youth Play (Videos)

[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.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by ccrroo

Whether he got the ball or not, he made contact trying to steal the ball.

Right, and the result of whatever potential contact he made was as if he had never made any at all. Your ballhandler didn't bat an eyelash and continued on his merry way.

Originally Posted by ccrroo

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.

Define "no bearing" on the play. Keep in mind you're ONLY watching the ball. Officials are not. We're watching cutters getting chucked/rerouted/held, rebounders being pushed/displaced, post players being held/pushed. That's all away from the ball in areas you're paying no attention to because coaches and fans (especially at this level) only see the ball.

But it absolutely has major bearing on the the plays. Without examples of the plays you have in mind, that's at least some food for thought.

[ccrroo]

If your still game, here are 2 more that confused me. Especially, in light of some of the stuff I've learned (contact not affecting the outcome type stuff -- I know poorly worded).

(I'm trying to embed this time, so I hope it works)

Video 6
Ref calls a block foul. I'm too biased and don't know the technicalities well enough to say otherwise. But in this case, the offense doesn't seem hindered. So why is the foul necessary?

http://youtu.be/CkEWlSeDq9Q



Video 7
No foul called here.
I see defender 1 sort of on top of the dribbler in a bad position but he's strong enough to dribble through, so ok (i'm learning). Then I see defender 2 cut across. And as the dribbler shoots, his elbow and leg hit defender 2 which causes an air ball. If vid 1 and 6 are blocks because the defender didn't have perfect position during contact, why is this different. The defender isn't in perfect condition during the contact.

http://youtu.be/J19VdVn35Jw

[Pantherdreams]

Originally Posted by 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.

Now you really are getting into the difference between knowing the rules as an official and a coach.

PLayer with the ball has no expectation of time and space must expect to be guarded. Player off the ball has an expectation of time and space.

Defender trying to get the steal is making a basketball play. Now official has to judge contact to see if ball carrier is disadvantaged. Defender hitting the off ball player has no reason to be doing so, thus much easier for official to say contact is impeding movement, leading to rough play etc.

[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.