What would you do?

Raymond · #1 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 07:30am

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yea, I remember sitting in the locker room at half and talking about that, wished I would have had an intentional instead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rooster

I'm not so sure you should be as hard on yourself. Is it possible that you were trying to clamp down on some building chippy-ness? Looking at the video before this play gold 20 was also acting like dope. (24:53, 27:06, 28:06, 29:02, 31:16) I'm wondering what you thought of the temperature of the game, especially considering that gold was getting wiped...

He is being hard on himself because the infraction was either a common personal foul or an intentional personal foul, but not a technical.

OKREF · #2 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 07:40am

The play at 28:06 was almost a big mess. My partner had a block, I had a PC. This is something we pre gamed, and in our corner, anytime we have a double whistle like this the lead has it, (in 2 man mechanics). Could have easily had a blarge here.

#3 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 10:16am

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

The play at 28:06 was almost a big mess. My partner had a block, I had a PC. This is something we pre gamed, and in our corner, anytime we have a double whistle like this the lead has it, (in 2 man mechanics). Could have easily had a blarge here.

Why did you even have a whistle there from Trail??

OKREF · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 11:36am

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed

Why did you even have a whistle there from Trail??

Yes the trail should hold his whistle, but I don't think there is anything wrong with the trail having a whistle, but just hold the signal to see what the lead has so we don't have conflicting signals. This play started in the trails primary, there's no way I'm giving it up without knowing for certain my partner has picked it up. He may be officiating post play and not pick it up clean. I'm staying with the drive, especially when it's into the lane.

deecee · #5 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 12:52pm

I don't see anything wrong with the T having a whistle here, in fact probably better from the T. I did think it was a PC.

edit. I meant the T should not have had a whistle here, I got my T's and L's mixed up again.

Raymond · #6 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 02:14pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yes the trail should hold his whistle, but I don't think there is anything wrong with the trail having a whistle, but just hold the signal to see what the lead has so we don't have conflicting signals. This play started in the trails primary, there's no way I'm giving it up without knowing for certain my partner has picked it up. He may be officiating post play and not pick it up clean. I'm staying with the drive, especially when it's into the lane.

But your partner did pick it up, and had a whistle. Cadence whistle is what is needed here.

#7 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 02:19pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yes the trail should hold his whistle

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

I don't think there is anything wrong with the trail having a whistle

These are conflicting statements, which do you truly believe?

#8 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 16, 2015, 11:02pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

Yes the trail should hold his whistle

Correct.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

I don't think there is anything wrong with the trail having a whistle

Wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

but just hold the signal to see what the lead has so we don't have conflicting signals

Certainly, this is standard for all double whistles.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

there's no way I'm giving it up without knowing for certain my partner has picked it up

It's in his primary. Do you not trust him to referee his primary, especially a strong-side drive to the basket (going away from you) with secondary defenders right in front of him??

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

He may be officiating post play and not pick it up clean.

What post play? This is a drive to the bucket right in his lap, I'd wager he's not refereeing post play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

I'm staying with the drive, especially when it's into the lane.

Which is totally fine, but you need to know what you as Trail have responsibility to referee and what your partner has to pick up. In this play Trail has the guy who gets beat off the dribble and BI/goaltending and that's it. As Trail you blew on a secondary defender block/charge situation. That is 100% Lead's call, and in two or three person there should be no way Trail ever has a whistle on that play. If Trail would have a whistle it would have to be for a hit on the drive prior to the block/charge.

I hear old dudes all the time pregame "if the drive starts in your primary you've got it all the way to the basket". This is old thinking and frankly just wrong by how we do things today.

Camron Rust · #9 (**permalink**) Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:58am

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed

Correct.

I hear old dudes all the time pregame "if the drive starts in your primary you've got it all the way to the basket". This is old thinking and frankly just wrong by how we do things today.

Well, we old dudes say that here but what we mean by that is actually what you describe above....the T has the primary defender all the way in to the shot. It is NOT referring to secondary defenders. It is to contrast with the old way of thinking where it was 100% the leads for all defenders once it enters the lane.

Raymond · #10 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 10:27am

Quote:

Originally Posted by OKREF

The play at 28:06 was almost a big mess. My partner had a block, I had a PC. This is something we pre gamed, and in our corner, anytime we have a double whistle like this the lead has it, (in 2 man mechanics). Could have easily had a blarge here.

You should not have had a whistle. Your partner should have called a PC.

Rooster · #11 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 06:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

He is being hard on himself because the infraction was either a common personal foul or an intentional personal foul, but not a technical.

In conjunction with the nonsense that was happening earlier (and then confirmed by the T early in the fourth Q) you don't think there was an element of unsporting behavior that needed to be nipped in the bud? FWIW I'm not married to the idea of a T here...

Do you think it was a non-basketball play?

Rich · #12 (**permalink**) Wed Jul 15, 2015, 11:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rooster

In conjunction with the nonsense that was happening earlier (and then confirmed by the T early in the fourth Q) you don't think there was an element of unsporting behavior that needed to be nipped in the bud? FWIW I'm not married to the idea of a T here...

Do you think it was a non-basketball play?

It's a live ball contact foul. By rule it cannot be a technical foul.

Camron Rust · #13 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 16, 2015, 03:29am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich

It's a live ball contact foul. By rule it cannot be a technical foul.

Unless you also rule there was an unsporting act in conjunction with the contact. It is always possible to violate more than one rule at a time.

Rich · #14 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 16, 2015, 07:12am

I think that's a stretch. Otherwise, every time someone commits an intentional foul we'd be having this discussion. That two handed push in the back? Well, it all started with an unsportsmanlike decision / act. Doesn't mean a technical foul is the right choice in that situation, either.

Rooster · #15 (**permalink**) Thu Jul 16, 2015, 02:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It is always possible to violate more than one rule at a time.

Yup, just ask my wife.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rich

I think that's a stretch. Otherwise, every time someone commits an intentional foul we'd be having this discussion. That two handed push in the back? Well, it all started with an unsportsmanlike decision / act. Doesn't mean a technical foul is the right choice in that situation, either.

Like I wrote, I'm not married to the idea of a technical foul here. Where I get hung up, however, is the non-basketball element of trying to trip someone as he goes by. Part of the hang-up: I could envision a coach arguing that "he was reaching for the ball."