Can Refs Help Improve Youth Play (Videos)
 

I've become very frustrated with basketball officiating at the youth level. Whether we win or lose (we've won a lot more than we've lost), my first thought is how bad the officiating was. I'm going to post some videos with the hopes ya'll can help me understand what the ref is thinking.

(I've never been trained to officiate and recognize it's a hard and thankless job.)

First video. It has to be a charge/block right? (LOL).
So my thoughts. We're trying to teach 7th graders how to take a charge. They have a right to space especially with an out of control offense that lowers their shoulder. So why wouldn't a ref give the benefit of the doubt to this player:
(note: the charge/block is hard to call and even harder to execute -- I've just about given up trying to teach it -- I think that's sad)

video -1
http://youtu.be/c-4j7GOS-Pc

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/c-4j7GOS-Pc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

So maybe it was block. But why wouldn't this reach be called in video 2. In video 1 the defender is trying to play nice fundamental defense. In this video 2, he just plainly reaches into the offenses body. No foul called.

video-2
http://youtu.be/s_NVl8XBYKI

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/s_NVl8XBYKI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

In my naive world, at the 7th grade level, as a ref --- I think I would be encouraging the defense in video 1 vs the defense in video 2. Yet it's not called that way. The sloppy way is rewarded.

Middle school ball is often the training grounds for new officials...just like it's the training grounds for many of the players. As such, you're not going to get the cream of the crop.

As to your clips, specifically the 2nd clip, I don't necessarily see a foul. Reaching in isn't a foul in of itself...if it was, then you could never steal the ball from the dribbler. Save for the four absolutes on a ball handler, the mere fact that there is contact on the dribbler isn't a foul.

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?

Coach,

You have come to a good place to ask these questions.

Some officials considers themselves "teachers" and want to teach the players how to play. Other officials consider their role to just be an official.

I recommend that you find Billy Mac's list of Most Misunderstood Rules. Most officials know these rules, but some don't know them all.

I agree with your assessment on both of these plays, but I wanted to provide an explanation for why those calls might have been made.

At a 7th grade level, I suspect that the officials aren't getting paid that much money and are relatively low on the totem pole.

In the first play, the key to drawing a charge is to establish Legal Guarding Position. However, that is not what television announcers talk about when they explain the block/charge rule. Announcers spout nonsense for drawing a charge such as "he has to be set" and "he can't already be falling down when he is hit". Many listeners, including some officials, will believe this. Although not required by rule, the defender is much more likely to draw the charge if he doesn't move once he has established Legal Guarding Position.

The defender was falling down, did move laterally, and did appear to protect himself. While he is allowed to do these things, some officials won't call a charge under any of these circumstances.

Officials can also be caught off-guard. If there hasn't been a block/charge call all game, he may not have been ready for it. The official may have been closely watching the offensive player and not seen the defender establish Legal Guarding Position and didn't really notice him until just before contact..

In the second play, the official might have seen the contact and decided that the foul didn't need to be called since the ball handler maintained possession. Some officials might have considered calling that foul a "game interruptor".

From a coaching standpoint, I would teach my players not to even attempt to draw a charge if they are in foul trouble simply because there is no guarantee that it will be called a charge. If you decide to point out the foul in the second play, don't use the term "reaching" (since "reaching" without contacting the opponent is not a foul.)

Thanks JeffM. Helpful stuff.

Not ever having officiated a real game, I'm at a huge disadvantage and ignorant. I'm also biased for my team. But when I review the video, I see so much contact. And when contact is called, it then seems so random. But it must not be. I must just not understand the nuances. And if I don't understand, I can't help the players.

I think we are done teaching the charge. The risk to reward is just too dang high. It seems much better to slap at the ball when the offense exposes it. That's just not called very often.

What's the correct way to say "reaching in and contacting the offense"?

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

3 more (if you like videos):

video 3:
What I saw - defender grabbed dribbler's shoulder
What did the ref see? (because it was a no call)
http://youtu.be/-zZ_SEwNWz0?list=UUZ...wLS23U8UlnYbFg

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-zZ_SEwNWz0?list=UUZJAsySrowLS23U8UlnYbFg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

video 4:
What I saw - first defender went straight through the dribbler and hit his body;
What the ref saw? Foul on defender 2 on the grab. (maybe not the correct terminolgy)
http://youtu.be/gDyXV-z05Vs

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/gDyXV-z05Vs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

video 5:
What I saw: first defender initates contact with offense; trips him and grabs his arm; second defender grabs his arm.
What did the ref see? (because it was a no call)
http://youtu.be/9nT8sDot2Ck

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9nT8sDot2Ck" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Information for parents
 

Coach,

I would refer the parents to the list of most misunderstood rules.

I don't think I would send them to this website unless they are especially interested. I think it is great that you want a better understanding of how the game is officiated.

I have coached a lot of youth sports (dozens of seasons of basketball, baseball, softball, and soccer).

Your parents should know that officials want to call the game fairly.

Your players should know that officials want to call the game fairly.

Your coaches should know that officials want to call the game fairly.

A lot of players would play better if they didn't worry about the officials. They get mad at the officials, lose focus and then don't play as well. Fans allow their anger at officials to take away from their enjoyment of the game, and more importantly, how they support their child.

Players and coaches use officials as an excuse to lose and then don't give maximum effort.

It might help if you consider officials to be sort of like policemen. Society wants policemen to prevent all of the murders, assaults, and robbery. But, I don't think society wants the policeman to pull over someone who is driving 57 in a 55. At a stop sign with no other cars in sight, is it ok if the driver stops a little in front of the line and doesn't come to a complete stop, but slows to 1 mph?

Another analogy is parenting. Should parents tolerate any misbehavior from their children or give a punishment for every single misbehavior? Different parents have different thresholds.

Officiating at the middle school level requires a lot of judgement.

APG
Thanks for the 4 absolutes. That's helpful and I will teach those (and pass along to parents).

Can you comment on why the defender in video 2 can not be in position and create contact with the offense. And why in the video 1 the defender can't try to maintain his position as the offense runs over him?

Stuff Good Players Should Know
 

I would still teach the charge, but not expect it to be called correctly every time.

Anything that looks like a foul could be called a foul. Reaching up looks less like a foul than slapping down.

Instead of saying "reaching", say "hitting" or "fouling" or "contacting".

If the defender is continually placing one hand on the ball handler, say "handcheck".

Instead of saying "over the back" say "displacing" (with the understanding that it is ok to reach over another player as long as there is no displacement)

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

Play 1: Charge

Play 2: Nothing

Play 3: Foul

Play 4: Foul on 2nd defender

Play 5: Foul on 2nd defender

AremRed -
It almost seems like the dribbler isn't protected as much as the shooter? Because if that much contact is made on a shot, it seems like a foul is usually called (video 4 and 5).

Or maybe another way to ask it is. On plays 4 and 5, are you saying no foul because no harm was done (ie. the dribbler didn't lose the ball in that instance). If the defender had taken the ball, would it still be a no foul. Again, its seem like that amount of contact on a shooter would create a call.

Play #1: Charge

Play #2: Nothing. I see a player reach around for the ball, but nothing that seems to affect the dribbler and his RSBQ at all.

Play #3: I see what could be a foul, but I see why it was not called. The dribbler tried to do something he was not in control to do and seemed to fall. I see the defender extend his arms, but I am not convinced he had anything to do with the control of the dribbler.

Play #4: I have a foul on the second kid after the spin.

Play #5: I do not have a foul on this play. A lot of grabbing for the ball.

Peace

JRutledge,

Do you think the talent and fluidity development can be hindered in a very physical game?

I'm just wondering if so much contact wasn't allowed, it would allow the players to develop and the game would look a lot more fluid.

Of course, the first couple of games might be painful. But the players/coaches might eventually adjust to less contact.

Just thinking out loud.

JeffM,

I used to be an "over the back" guy but a forum like this taught me better a few years ago. Those others are good, too.

Our failure to success ratio on charges is about 10:1 so I think we are shutting it down until something changes (we learn to teach it better or the kids develop more).

Though, I think they are athletic enough to attack/disrupt the dribbler like is shown in several videos, so our time might be better spent working on that. My mistake for not teaching that style (as I thought they were fouls).

Thanks.

I think you'll find the airborne shooter more protected from contact than the dribbler at every level. Refereeing the dribbler and contact from defender is a very tough play in terms of judgement. I can see why the referees passed on all those plays -- they are all in that gray area. These plays are a perfect example of why the game needs to be cleaned up with automatic fouls -- these kids are not skilled enough to be reaching in like that all the time. They see reaching in go unpunished all the time in college and pro ball and they think they are John Stockton 2.0 with their ability to get steals.

#2 isn't a foul because it doesn't meet any of the absolutes and the dribbler is not put at a disadvantage. Contact isn't a foul here. If the ball comes out or the dribbler is slowed or redirected then it's a foul.

Contact on a shot is subject to advantage / disadvantage, too.

Your answers would match mine most closely.

No. If you are a really baller or gym rat, you can play in just about any situations. The game used to be more physical and I did not see anyone that was good not being able to adjust.
Just thinking out loud.

Hard to tell for certain from the angle in the video but I see a defender that was leaning, to some degree, beyond the position he obtained. That could make it a block. If your shoulders are not above your feet, your shoulder is not in legal position. As for the lowered shoulder by the offense....don't care. If the defense isn't legal, it doesn't really matter much unless it is extreme. Only the defense has rules governing legal position. If they're not in it and there is body to body contact, the foul is on the defender. Most players, when running or making a move, have their shoulder lowered to some degree.
In video 2, I can't tell you for sure that there was even contact. There could have been...but it is inconclusive.

It is all about angles. When you have the wrong angle, a lot of things look like something they're not.

It's middle school ball. If we were to call every single time there was any contact or anything mildly questionable the games would take 4 hours. I like JRUT don't teach, I don't care to teach, I'm not paid to teach.

I don't do these games because they bore me to that. With that being said, a lot of guys do these games just for the money, or they are brand new. You're not really getting varsity refs, in fact barely freshman level guys on many occasions.

I would recommend you get a rule book and read it. That's the best way to learn the rules. But my assessment of all these plays is similar to what others have responded with.

There is no such thing as over the back, and there is no such foul for just lowering the shoulders, fouls rely on one constant only. CONTACT. In the absence of contact, you have an absence of a foul.

I also agree with these.

On play 5, first, the camera angle and the official's angle are almost 180* different -- and that can make a lot of difference in what the official sees (And, I'm not sure how the play developed, but I would say the official was out of position). Second, while there was some contact with the Red arm, it was all / mostly after Black had placed his hand on the ball and was because Red was pulling away. Especially since Red kept the ball, I'm passing on any foul here.

Apologies for not getting the quote feature to work. I'm trying to figure it out.

"If we were to call every single time there was any contact or anything mildly questionable the games would take 4 hours."

Or maybe the coaches and players would adjust.

"and there is no such foul for just lowering the shoulders,"

Agree 100%. I would just suggest that lowering a shoulder and initiating contact with a defender, even if he's isn't in perfect position, would make for a better game. I wish the rules were worded more that way -- who initiated the contact.

"fouls rely on one constant only. CONTACT. In the absence of contact, you have an absence of a foul."

I would argue that CONTACT isn't a constant. Sure no contact, no foul. Unfortunately, when there is contact, then there might be a foul.

I think what is causing you conflict is that you are teaching your kids to attempt to play well with feet and avoid creating illegal contact of any kind. This is good, but the problem is that the rules don't say illegal contact automatically equals foul. So while our kids defend properly you seem to expect a call everytime this doesn't happen. If it did any time anyone bumped or ran into each other or on every rebound there would be fouls called.

Illegal contact must be judged to be a foul or incidental.

Without going into all the criteria simply put then the 4 automatics others have shared with you the two criteria for determining that a foul are:

1) Does it create a clear an immediate advantage for the player commiting illegal contact or does it create a clear and immediate disadvantage for the player being contacted?

2) Is the contact excessive or leading to rough play?

If the official doesn't determine the contact to have met either of these criteria it is ruled incidental contact and play continues.

Some teams play like you no hands ever, trying to play without illegal contact. Others play at the edge of the rules risking fouls gambling that by playing a more physical game that the risk will outweigh the rewards. In most of the cases you sited what I'm watching is very subjective in terms of whether the player is gaining a clear and immediate advantage or disadvantage from the contact. Some officials might say they are impeded or its leading to rough play, but many will see players playing through it, or making bad decisions or being out of control anyway so determine that the contact is not creating a problem.

So? It would be equally true to say "when there is contact there might not be a foul."

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.

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.

For The Good Of The Cause ...
 

To ccrroo...kudos to you for coming here to seek advice and answers. Most youth coaches don't care enough to go to such lengths to get (correct) answers.
You are getting excellent advice from a goldmine of experienced and talented basketball officials.

The broader view...you should approach the leadership of your league and calmly and diplomatically suggest that they contract with officals who are experienced and agree to "teach". You have heard from those here that don't see their role as teacher at your level. I can assure you there are just as many of us are willing to teach young players (and coaches) during games. I got my start in youth rec ball and I will still gladly do it on occasion. If your league is clear about the experience and expectations, they will likely get officials better suited to the leagues needs. Clear communication UP FRONT is the key with any assigner. He or she knows which individuals would accept the role of teacher or trainer and which ones won't. Obviously, it's going to cost a little more but I contend that it will be worth it...less frustration among players, coaches, and parents.

perspective
 

I played and coached and "parented" until my youngest graduated High School. When I started officiating I was stunned at the difference in the way officials see the game. I found that the people "in charge" (ie the ones who write the checks) decide the often unwritten rules that govern the games. Understanding these interpretations make all the difference in the world as you watch officials work games. The reality is that I now call games in the same manner that infuriated me when I was a player, coach and parent. (Video #2 is a prime example of where I would scream "Where's the foul?" and today I wouldn't have a whistle).

Illegal contact is ALWAYS a foul...but all contact isn't illegal. Contact is either illegal or incidental.

That would be a very different game. Initiating contact simply isn't a foul and doesn't even determine who a foul is on. There are pretty clear rules on who can do what and it isn't about initiating contact. When a player does something illegal and there is contact, then there is a foul. There are many legal ways for contact to occur.

For the most part, the rules governing contact apply to the defender. We spend 95% of our time watching the DEFENDER. If there is contact sufficient for a foul, they must be legal, if not, foul on the defender regardless of who initiates the contact. If they're legal, then the foul is on the offense.

We may be dealing with semantics issue here.

But if a player violates the legal guarding position and cylinder rules and creates contact, that by definition would be illegal contact. We need to judge whether that illegal contact was incidental or impacts the play. Just as all touches are not fouls, the touching does violate the rules in regards to their cylinders.

As i said we may be parsing semantics here, I think we are advocating the same thing. If you break a rule in making contact that is illegal, if we judge that contact to be sufficient to warrant a foul we call it. Saying it wasn't illegal contact would indicate a rule/guideline was not violated. The action is either within the rules or without, fouls are determined based on rules and application of the Tower Principle. Deciding contact was incidental doesn't make the action within the rules, just acceptable based on our judgement of advantage disadvantage.

ie. Why they went to 4 automatics. These types of illegal contact were being based on as incidental, now the illegal action = foul automatically.

no, contact is illegal or incidental. Incidental contact is never illegal. They went to the four automatics because too many were ruling the contact incidental/legal.

Without looking at your videos I'll start out asking you what level of quality do expect for the level of basketball being played?

I can't answer what some random officials on video were thinking because I've never spoke to them.

I think we are just dealing with semantics here. Illegal = contrary to the rules.


Contact is judged as illegal based on rule and tower principle by us calling fouls, contact can violate the rules but be deemed incidental based on principles.

By definition of the word illegal, though the second an action is contrary to the statues/laws or contrary to rules and regulations it is illegal.

Splitting hairs at this point.

Ok, now I've watched the videos.

1) Whether this is a PC or Block, it is not something I would put under the banner of "what was he thinking!?", as if it was some egregious call.

2) If this were a newer official and I was observing his game, I would commend him for his patience in letting the play continue and not stopping the game with an unnecessary whistle.

And most definitely a training ground for coaches. ;)

And now I've seen 5 videos and all I see is a bunch of sloppy 7th grade basketball. Still haven't seen a play where I would say "OMG, he really missed that".

Coach, have any parents sent you any videos asking why you are running certain plays? Or showing how well their kid plays, but you are still not giving them enough playing time? I'm asking this seriously.

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.

When I was coaching my children when they were under ten, I would try to talk to the officials before the game and say that it may be difficult for the defense to play without fouling, but it was very difficult for the offensive players to make plays when they were being fouled. Sometimes, I thought it helped, but most officials seemed to ignore my advice and not call many fouls.

When I am officiating HS varsity, I expect the players to be able to play through contact and they have to earn the "and-ones". When I am officiating players 9 and under, I try to call the fouls, but let a lot of the violations go unless they are really bad OR if the violation (e.g., travelling) enabled them to score a basket when they wouldn't have otherwise. 7th graders fall somewhere in the middle and they should be able to play through some contact. Similarly, on defense, it is OK to make some contact. You should permit some contact by the defense in practice. A foul is just a foul; it is not a sin.

Before the game, you could ask the officials if players are allowed to "hand-check" the dribbler.

Before a nine-yr-old game that I am going to call, I may tell the coaches that I plan to call the fouls, but not call the marginal violations. The reaction of the coaches is about 50-50. Some say thanks and others say that they need to learn the rules. I had one set of 9-yr-old coaches who wanted me to call the violations in the first game of the year. So, I did and the final score was something like 6-2, The 8-yr-old game which I had right before that one was 18-14 with not a lot of walking and carrying calls made. In the long run, I don't think it makes a difference. The kids will eventually learn to play through contact and play without committing violations very often. I just happen to think it is more fun when more points are scored.

(It is interesting officiating 9-yr-old girls games when so many of them play defense by standing next to the offensive player but don't get in the offensive players "bubble" even it they are in the paint.)

(RBSQ -> Rhythm, Balance, Speed and Quickness. If contact does not affect the ball handler's RBSQ, there isn't going to be a foul.)

"hey, he touched him"
 

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.

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.

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.

Physician, heal thy self
 

I had a coach this week yell to his players "look out, these guys are calling EVERYTHING." It seems that parents/coaches are constantly complaining that we aren't calling enough fouls and then complain that we call to many.

As a ref I don't care who wins, who fouls out, what the foul count is, etc. I only care about enforcing the rules using my judgement and experience. I always "call it both ways", I know how to "count to three", and "yes coach, that really was a foul".

When I was coaching basketball I got T'd up regularly for "working" the refs too hard. Now that I'm on this side of the game I realize I was out of line most of the time and wish I had a better understanding of advantage/disadvantage, RSBQ, illegal contact, and the rules in general. It would have made me a better coach.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/CkEWlSeDq9Q" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

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

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/J19VdVn35Jw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Exactly. Refs are envisioning what might have happened if a player is held/pushed away from the ball. He might have cut to the low block for a layup or he might have just stayed put. Or his teammate may have never seen him.

I'm asking for the same imagination. It takes extra energy for the dribbler to constantly have to fight through that contact. It takes his focus away from starting the offense or seeing a wide open teammate down court. If a ref can imagine something that might be impeded, I'm asking for the same.

And that goes to my main point. If in general, less contact was allowed, the players would adjust and refs would actually have an easier job.

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.

Rules for time and space are different for on and off ball players. Chances of play off the ball having less to do with the play and playing basketball are also greater so greater risk of leading to rough play. Not apples and apples.

In the top video, the defender did not establish legal guard position before contact was made. Since LGP is actually defined by rule (4-23) it gets a call. This is not a situation where we are looking at the offense being hindered to determine if the contact was legal because the rule tells us its not. Therefore, foul.

In the bottom video, from this angle I would agree with you but I also have three reasons why this wasn't called. First, the ref had a different angle and although to us it looks like the contact made disrupted the shot the official may have seen the contact as marginal or could have seen it as a pass and not a shot so the offense was not hindered. Second, the ref may be inexperienced and is still learning to judge contact on these playes. Third, maybe he just missed it -- it happens.

Its also important to remember that not all contact is the same no matter how much it looks like the same contact.

Video 6: Block. The offense most certainly is hindered. This player has every intention of driving to the hoop and shooting until a defender enters his path at the last second without establishing legal guarding position (2 feet down and facing the opponent). The result? A pass out to the deep wing instead of a potential layup. Block all day.

Video 7: Nothing. Defender 1 is borderline, but has no impact on your player getting exactly where he wants to get exactly when he wants to get there. But when he does, he's surprised by defender 2 running through to the endline and he loses the ball out of bounds. Elbow/leg contact (if any) is incidental. The result is a disappointing finish to an ill-advised drive into obvious pressure.

You're not seeing this through an even remotely objective lens, and I applaud that passion. I especially, however, applaud your video work. These are AWESOME clips of youth games, and I mean that sincerely. You have skills!

I tend to think that officiating at that level is commensurate to the coaching level and playing level. the mistakes made by the officials are on par with the mistakes made by the players and the coaches

Defender 2 in the bottom video isn't required to be in legal guarding position?
It may not show on the video, but his elbow is hit by the defender and his leg is kicked out. And the ball barely gets of out his hand, as a result.

(warning- sarcasm -- if the dribbler wasn't constantly having to fight (be a strong dribbler) around defenders making contact out of legal guarding position, then maybe he would've been strong enough to fight through the incidental contact to his elbow and leg)

Thanks. Not even my best work - lol
I use a gopro mounted on the wall. Then use VLC to zoom and slow it down. But then the quality goes down quickly when I record the clip on my cell phone camera (because I'm too lazy to edit the clip outside of VLC).

also, you should join the local officials association. you could work the age groups other than your team. this way you would be helping out from both sides of the fence.

Guys -- I'm checking out now. I sincerely appreciate the comments and patience. I will save this as a reminder to never become a basketball official and never attempt coaching above the middle school level.

If I have a beef, it's with the rule book, not the guys enforcing the rules. And that's pretty weak as I don't know the rules all that well.

We will stop teaching the charge.
And we will stop teaching to play defense with feet and start stressing playing defense with hands. At the very least, we should be teaching what is shown in the videos I've submitted.

This is MS. You get what you get. I mean what if we try and explain advantage/disadvantage, or Rythm/Speed/Balance/Quickness, or even evaluating a play from start to finish.

Sometimes fouls call themselves and sometimes they don't. At your level I highly double many of the advanced officiating techniques are being applied. Most likely it's call what needs to be called, let the rest go.

You're over thinking MS basketball. The kids aren't that good for the most part. The coaches are usually at the same level or worse than the kids. The officials are 2 guys or gals wearing black shorts/pants with striped shirts and a whistle, and they are whoever the assignor could get to cover the game.

Keep teaching. Kids that play sloppy defense and never learn the fundamentals usually fouls out of games pretty quick.

The defender did not make contact because he was trying to take a "guarding" position on the dribbler so we would be judging it based on incidental vs illegal. LGP becomes a factor when a defender is trying to place his body in the path of an offensive opponent. The defender here appears to be rushing over to attack the ball because the dribbler beat the first guy.

Not really. If choose to not call a foul, you have determined that the play was LEGAL in the context of the entire set of rules....including the advantage/disadvantage/incidental elements. The action could have been illegal if it had an effect on the play (RSBQ, for example) but if it doesn't, then it is not illegal.

Dang it. I came back.
I thought the defender tried to place his body in the path.
But if attacking the ball allows for this contact (including tripping in this case). That's what we should be teaching. Attack the ball as it seems to allow for lots of contact. Especially on strong ball handlers.

Now it seems we are back to semantics. In this case, whether he tried to place his body in the path or he attacked the ball, the result was the same. The dribbler/shooter had his RSBQ affected.

And the irony is that neither defender ever touch the ball. They only touched the dribbler. In the first case, he was able to strongly dribble through. And in the second case, his strength gave out. Those are incredible rules.

More irony. The final foul count in this game was probably 25 to 10 (3 of our players fouled out). I posted 2 of our fouls. Both blocks. One of the hardest to teach and officiate. But I didn't post the other 23 because they looked like fouls to me. I posted what I thought were missed fouls by our opponents. I should go back and apply what I've learned to understand why our other 23 fouls were called.

Last irony -- we are the team trying to play defense with out feet (admittedly, a mistake and poor coaching).

I repeat the above, and emphasize the below.

No conversation we have here is going to change the officiating of or your relationship with the officials doing your middle school games.

First, you have to remember that we are talking about judgements here. As refs, its our job to make these judgements. Different refs under different situations might make different jidgements. As a former ciach I understand your perspective and can see what you are seeing. But as a ref I know that calls such as tese are almost never as simple or clear cutbas coaches think they should be. You will just have to accept that the refs are doing their best to apply the rules correctly and make sound judgements.

Second, you have to remember that refs have varied levels of experience and ability just like players and coaches. As others have pointed out, many nights you will not have the least qualified refs because we all had to start some where and middle school is where refs start. On the other hand, when very experienced refs like myself pick up amiddle school game we get a lot of grief because we see more and call it tighter than they're used to.

Third, please continue to teach your kids properly. They need to play defense with their feet (not their hands) and get into proper position. They need to know how to take a charge. And they also need to know how to play through contact. What you teach them now will serve them later. Most of your posts lead me to believe you are doing a goid job with your kids. Don't let plays that can be judged in different ways or bad calls cause you to start teaching them to do things that will hurt them at higher levels when the officiating improves.

This doesn't make sense. You said the foul count was 25-10 against you.

So, it wasn't that they weren't calling fouls, and, you could get away with more physical play. The issue was that they were calling them on YOUR team.

Also, you said that you thought you legitimately committed about 23 of them. And, you show 7 or 8 videos where it looks like only a few calls were missed. So, out of 35+ plays where contact occurred, the officials may have missed a few? That's pretty darn good for the 7th grade officials I know.

Post the whole unedited video on youtube. Or, the first half should be enough. I'll tell you exactly what you need to do to get your team back on track. (Hint - it's not gonna be trying to get away with fouls).

A) I get that. I guess my point was that in the context of the OP is that the term illegal by definition is contrary to the rules/regulations.

Since the average person is not going to clinics or reading the interps, but at the very best reading or hearing a rule from the book at the worst getting 2nd or 3rd hand myths. In the case of the OP the actions of the opposing team go against the rules as written in the section on fouling. However the determination of whether a foul is called has many more factors then are listed word for word in just one section of the rule book. So someone who has a limited or literal understanding of the rule is watching something they could quite literally argue as illegal.

B) I don't think I'm ever determing incidental contact was "legal" just passing on it. I think a better analogy might be to compare it to actual legal situations where someone is speeding but only by a couple of MPH's or a criminal does something but because of lack of evidence they don't get prosecuted. THis doesn't mean they didn't do something illegal it means that they weren't charged, fined or prosecuted. In regards to the OP this is more inline with the coaches complaint and issues then trying to explain how an action is legal this time but not legal that time.

My brother in law coaches at a local HS. He had similar complaints not with officiating but the way rules got enforced by officials in another district where he had to play. He tried to teach his kids to play with their feet and help drawing charges. So when there was a collision with offense that was attacking hard they had accelerated enough that it was a train wreck and something was called. Now and then a charge or push but often a block. A lot of borderline but thats the reality of judgement calls, not his beef. The other teams in this area defend with a lot of contact on the ball carrier never allowing them to get seperation or any head of steam at all. So his ball carriers wouldn't ever go hard, or would straighten up and try to do something else. Resulting in his team (that he is seeing as less physical) getting more calls against then the team who is more physical.

Solution for him was time, weights, sacrifice. After a couple of seasons in the weight room his team eventually got strong enough to fight through the initial bumps to turn the corner and either finish (they aren't used to needing to help) or continuing through contact until they official is forced to call a foul (they are carrying the player, they make the player drag them to the ground, etc). Now they are fine in those situations.


In your situation you are a middle school coach. Now this is totally my opinion but for what its worth:

A) If you teach your kids to defend properly they will be better off in the long run. They will know how to defend when reaching and grabbing are not enough to turn over a good strong HS ball carrier. These other kids/teams will not have anything to fall back on.

B) You are not just dealing with the all the rules you know, rules you don't, rules interps that you are learning about here. Every call in your games has all those elements but also the reality that you've got officials who are most likely not even top officials, you've got the perception that kids are unskilled and out of control, you've got coaching/playing/officiating that is not really high level. So now even if we tell you what the rule is and how it should be called and you understand, between the other team, your kids abilities/size, officials ability, interest level, desire . . . you are not going to get things called as consistently or accurately as we are all talking about here.

I read this thread at first, then I skimmed through parts of the rest before I gave up.

I did see where the coach asked "remember tht title of this thread -- Can Refs Help Improve Youth Basketball.?"

As the coach surmises, we cannot. That's because we do not have the ability (at least in the specific sense) of getting the rules changed to match what the coach thinks would be better for youth basketball.

I'm done, too. I tried to be helpful, I tried to explain to him how things were.

He came back sarcastic. He came back acting like we were the ones who have no clue.

That's fine -- he has no idea what the purpose of a basketball official is. For the most part, we're calling fouls when a team is disadvantaged -- it's our job to keep a game fair according to the rules, not according to a coach's perception of what constitutes the "right" way or "wrong" way to play defense.

Those defenders can play defense with their arms all day. One of three things will happen:

(1) B will pick up a lot of fouls when an A player is disadvantaged or when they commit an automatic.

(2) The A players will not be disadvantaged, but B will be by putting themselves out of position.

(3) B will get very lucky and get the ball clean every time. This is unlikely.

Apologies for the sarcasm. It was to be directed at the rules themselves. Not the guys that enforce them (or take their time to try to explain them).
Thanks again. I've learned a lot and will watch games much differently (and try to teach other parents and coaches).

I admit I'm "That Guy" on the coaching box rule, but does anyone besides me have an issue in the the very first video with both coaches off the bench? (1 kneeling and 1 standing?) Would you pass on it in youth level but talk to the bench in the Varsity level?

I wouldn't care at any level...unless the assistant was calling attention to himself, if you know what I mean.

Yes I care. I only care in the sense to set a standard. I do not want assistants standing or violating the rule and like this tape, I am shown not applying the rule. I do not T these just because, I just correct it by talking to the coach. The coaching box has been a big deal in our state and I have let coaches know we will enforce this rule if they put us in that situation.

Peace

I'm with you if he's constantly off the bench. I'd probably notice that.

I have a problem with an AC up AND showing a reaction to the call.

If he's up a) consistently or b) coaching me, it's going to get addressed.

HC will likely get a polite reminder in "a". In "b", there may or may not be a warning before a technical foul.

Adress what needs to be addressed
 

If the AC remains standing , address it.
If the AC is whinning or reacting to calls, address it.
If the AC is squatting/kneeling at the bench to skirt the standing up rule, address it.


But if the AC is simply squatting/kneeling in front of their chair while coaching their team I have no problem with it until a line gets crossed. I they are moving to different places or only kneeling when we look their way then I am suspect but maybe the AC is just "sitting" in a way that is more comfortable (perhaps a back injury???).

Two examples:

I have worked games in small gyms that did not have enough seats for the whole team. When some players were standing I told coach they would have to sit, even if that meant sitting on the floor. One of the AC's gave up his seat and kneeled at the end of the bench so layers could sit. I did not make him sit all the way down.

I had a game where the an AC who was tracking stats on an ipad would kneel in front of the bench to get a better view. She didn't move around, never said a word, didn't coach the players, and drew no attention to herself other than the fact that she would kneel in front of her chair to see better. Saw no reason to address it.

For me it boils down to understanding the intent of the coaching box & only the HC standing rule. It is there so we can address problems and that's what I look for.

Coach-

I didn't make it through all the posts, so if I'm repeating, apologies. I've coached and parented and Jr high and below, I played in HS, and I reffed MS as an untrained ref back in HS.

A few thoughts:

Don't waste your time worrying about what the refs are going to call at this level. The variety of skills, training, styles are going to be such that the simple fact is it's going to vary. And it is going to vary from oh-my-god-horrible to so-so. You are going to have refs who call based on myths, on what they saw on TV last week, and what they remember from when they played. Live with it. (Even if your MS league decided to up the pay, the simple fact is that the best refs have more fun doing higher level games and are going to do that even if the pay is the same.)

Even better officials often have trouble adjusting as the level of play can vary dramatically. My son's 8th grade CYO team (which is pretty decent) was playing in a tournament where the game before had two attoricious teams. The refs had to be lax about travelling, etc., between these two unskilled teams or it would have been a whistle fest from which the boys would have learned nothing and had no fun. Our game was more skilled and competitive -- it took the refs several minutes to readjust to the skill level of that game. It's just the nature of the age.

What does that mean as a coach. It means you need to teach your players:
*How to play through contact -- there are simply going to be days when a lot of contact is allowed and they have to deal with and just keep playing
*How to avoid contact that might be called as a foul when they are on defense
*How to adjust to what the refs are calling today
*How to play the game and focus on playing not the refs

Sometimes you just need to mutter the serenity prayer under your breath ("grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change . . . .")

At the end of the day, I think far too many coaches (and I am very able to be guilty of this, and have even this season) can get too focussed on the calls and the refs to the detriment of the players. If we focus on the kids on our team, and on teaching them skills and how to work as a team, those bad and inconsistent calls are going to balance out.

Coach- Let me first say that in this day and age where internet forums are filled with people like me who think they know everything, its encouraging to see someone genuinely seeking to learn. I haven't gone through this whole thread but you've received some great feedback already and I'd like to add a few things from the perspective of someone who has coached, officiated, and run various levels of youth sports leagues for local parks and rec agencies, boys and girls clubs, and AAU tournaments.

I very much concur with the post above. There are a few facts that you are going to have to accept about the officiating at the level of ball that you are now coaching-

* Officials CAN help improve youth play but that is NOT their objective or priority. A lot goes into officiating that non-officials likely do no think about. Referees at this level are often learning themselves and their objective is to learn how to officiate not teach kids how to play. That's what the coaches are for.

* Officiating this level of play is often more challenging than higher levels b/c the players lack body control making it hard to determine whether or not its the actual contact placing players at a disadvantage. Remember that, by rule, all contact is not a foul and many players at this age/level become off balanced on their own accord. They also lack overall fundamentals and skill resulting in awkward execution of moves that make it difficult to judge legality. Combine this with the point above regarding less experienced refs and you are going to get officiating that ranges from awful at worst to inconsistent at best.

*You have no control over the officiating and should not expect very experienced, or frankly, very good officials to be working these types of games. Expecting these games to be officiated at a high level would be the same as expecting your kids to play the game at a high level. Do you get as frustrated that your kids don't shoot over 50%, execute complex offensive sets, finish above the rim, etc.? Of course not. And you actually have some control over their play as opposed to the performance of the officials. And frankly, if the videos you posted are the worst of the officiating at your games, then you don't have it that bad. A lot of those plays have no impact on the game and/or are calls that are going to be missed by having 2 officials as opposed to 3 person crews that work most games at the varsity level and up.

Given these things I would offer the following advice:

* Adjust your perspective and Stop focusing on, and stressing over, the officiating. You have no control over it, should not have any reasonable expectation that these types of games will included experienced high level officials, and as you admitted you have limited rules knowledge yourself, which makes you less than qualified to offer a true critique of the officiating.

* Take your energy and instead invest it in your players and yourself as a coach. Its great that you sought out this forum to learn more about officiating but your focus should really be on learning more about coaching the game. Are you attending any trainings/clinics for coaching? Reading books about coaching? Finding drills on teaching fundamentals? Asking local HS or other experienced coaches if you can attend their practices or summer camps? I don't know how much time you have or what you ultimately want to get out of this but there are lots of resources out there if you truly want to get better as a coach. And it would be time MUCH better spent than worrying about the officiating or coming to this site.

* Even if you don't have a lot of time and are only coaching at this level to "help out" or something along those lines, I would at the very least search the web or go to the library for some basic resources on coaching and drilling fundamentals. Regardless the skill level of your players, you can never go wrong teaching fundamentals of the game. And if your players are fundamentally sound, they will get the benefit of the doubt on officiating over the long haul. And more importantly it will lead to a better experience and they will get more out of playing this game, even if it's just to pass time and get some exercise once or twice a week.