Blown Call

[bjudge]

Originally posted by mcrowder
bjudge, you just knocked the sails out of your argument entirely. Respect or not, once you walk on the field, you should respect your partners' ability to make calls in their zones. Otherwise, you have chaos. Perhaps he doesn't respect you either ... where would it end? Get past it, and call the game TOGETHER. If you readily admit that you would not be questioning the call if you respected him more, then you are also admitting the possibility that YOU didn't see it as well as you proclaim to have seen it. In essence, you are telling us, "I am positive I was right, and he was wrong ... except that if I trusted this guy more, maybe I didn't see it that well after all." Hypocrisy, wouldn't you agree?

Agreed, life is full of hypocrisy. I am not saying that i wouldnt feel different about the call if i respected the official that made the call, what i am saying is that i think things would have been handled much differently. If I respected the official, i probably would have chalked it up as he made a mistake and moved on. But what rubbed me the wrong way in this situation is that offical had the attitude that he made a call and didnt want to discuss it. So if he is not willing to accept the fact he MAY have made a mistake or accept constructive criticism, then he has no motivation to improve. Which means, these types of calls will continue to be made.

[Forksref]

Originally posted by mikesears
I want to add my two cents. If we go to another official with an "I think", we might as well just quit right there. We aren't doing anything to get the call right.

However, if we can go to an official and say, "I am 100% certain of what I saw, what did you see?" then we should go to the calling official and let him change his call if he wants. I'm not changing it for him but I am giving him information to allow the calling official to change it.

I do believe that we should "get it right" but only when we can offer 100% assurance of what we saw. And yes, I've seen NFL crews do this on occasion.

Mike makes a good point about talking it over and getting it "right."

I was BJ on a varsity game a couple of weeks ago. I have been with this crew for three years. The white hat is over 60 and set in his ways. The U had a holding call on the offense near the LOS and the end of the run was behind it since the running back was stuffed in the backfield. The R marked off the penalty from the spot of the foul. I told the U that was wrong but he never relayed it to the R. We talked about it at half-time and realized it was administered wrong. I think every crew should have an understanding that everyone will be listened to if they have a concern and not rush through the penalty administration. I have white-hatted a lot and I think I know what I am doing out there. As a matter of fact, the R sometimes asks me what signal to use in reporting fouls.

Crews should be open to what a crew member has to add to a situation.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Forksref


Mike makes a good point about talking it over and getting it "right."

I was BJ on a varsity game a couple of weeks ago. I have been with this crew for three years. The white hat is over 60 and set in his ways. The U had a holding call on the offense near the LOS and the end of the run was behind it since the running back was stuffed in the backfield. The R marked off the penalty from the spot of the foul. I told the U that was wrong but he never relayed it to the R. We talked about it at half-time and realized it was administered wrong. I think every crew should have an understanding that everyone will be listened to if they have a concern and not rush through the penalty administration. I have white-hatted a lot and I think I know what I am doing out there. As a matter of fact, the R sometimes asks me what signal to use in reporting fouls.

Crews should be open to what a crew member has to add to a situation.

This is not at all like the situation that was being discussed. Where we administer a penalty from is not the same as whether or not we call a foul or not. I think people are trying to use a term that does not apply to all situations. You cannot just have all judgment calls up for debate. If you do, we will have conferences all game long. We have to allow our partners to make calls without constantly being challenged. Whether or not we administer a penalty from is not an issue of judgment. That is an issue of rules application and taking our time to apply the rules properly. That is always acceptable. And even in judgment calls we can have more information brought to the table to help us make a call. But if all we have is I saw one thing and you saw another that is never a good thing if the person that made the call feels strongly in their call. We have to do better than, “I saw something different than you did."

Peace

[mcrowder]

You keep not answering the question...

Why, in your opinion, when two officials disagree on what they saw, should we immediatly and uniformly default to the one of those two that threw a flag, and the one that saw the same action, but NOT see a foul or throw a flag, must defer to the judgement of the other... in other words, why do we assume, in such cases, that the one throwing a flag was RIGHT in his judgement call, and completely dismiss the other official's judgement call (for certainly it was judgement that caused him to NOT throw a flag)?

I've posted my opinion on why we do this, but you've not, and I'm curious to hear if your reasoning mirrors mine or supplements it.

[DJ]

I would strongly agree that if it is not in your area of coverage unless your 100% sure you better stay in your own turf. Guessing is not the answer. Likewise, if you are unsure of your turf and need help with your call, I hope your crew members will "Not leave you hanging!" It takes an excellent official to be able to handle these situations and that's where experience and good judgement come into play and determine if you are an asset to your crew or........!

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by mcrowder
You keep not answering the question...

Why, in your opinion, when two officials disagree on what they saw, should we immediatly and uniformly default to the one of those two that threw a flag, and the one that saw the same action, but NOT see a foul or throw a flag, must defer to the judgement of the other... in other words, why do we assume, in such cases, that the one throwing a flag was RIGHT in his judgement call, and completely dismiss the other official's judgement call (for certainly it was judgement that caused him to NOT throw a flag)?

I've posted my opinion on why we do this, but you've not, and I'm curious to hear if your reasoning mirrors mine or supplements it.

Trusting your partner is one of the most important things you can do when officiating your game. It is that simple. I do not throw flags personally when I think I am wrong. I do not throw flags if I am unsure. Now I had to learn to do that over some time, but if I am confident in a call, if I did not feel confident I would not throw the flag. Of course we can have a disagreement, but I was getting it right in my mind when I threw the flag or blew the whistle. I work in 3 sports and my point of view rings true in all of them. It is not my job to tell my partner he screwed up every time I disagree. If he is not doing his job, he will not be there. If an assignor has a problem with my crew or an individual on the crew, he will inform the crew chief and we will have to make a decision. If I want to nitpick a call that is what tape is for. Even on tape it can be difficult to really evaluate all judgment calls. But I can see if an official is in position to make a call. I know in a lot of basketball camps, they evaluators will not even make an issue of what judgment an official has, but deal with "things to think about and to look for." We will go round and round if every call is up for debate and discussion. You might say that will not happen, but are you sure it will not happen if we advocate a discussion on judgment calls? I have never said you can never debate a call, but to just say you have a different opinion is not a very good reason. Maybe if there was another player that knocked him into the defensive player and the contact was not just based on an attempted block, I can easily see a discussion or a debate about the call. But you do not go to a person that did not see the call. A Referee should not entertain that kind of discussion when all he is given is an opinion. The non-calling official needs to get to the calling official and talk it out. If the calling official agrees, then when they get to the Referee he can be told to pick it up. I have a rule on my crew. When there are more than one flag, I want to hear why everyone threw a flag. I do not signal until I hear for both officials. I also tell my crew to make sure when they have flags; they discuss it with each other to see if there are any differences. When they get to me, the decision needs to be made. I am not there to debate the call; I am there to make a decision. And that decision is not my decision, it is their decision. This is all pregamed and we have already decided what kind of situations requires a discussion. If this guy was on my crew, this would not be one of them.

After all is said and done, this is just an opinion. If you feel it helps your crew and the perception of the crew to debate judgment calls, which of course is your right to feel that way. I know many officials you would piss off and cause a lot of conflict if you did what you suggest. This is also not an acceptable practice where I live. There are many officials that cannot find games because they try to do this to officials that have been working a long time. If you think using a pea whistle is a better than using a Fox 40, who am I to stop you. I will say this, there is a reason some get to the top and many stay at the bottom. You can be right and be very wrong at the same time.

Peace

[SJoldguy]

For what it is worth... here is what I learned along time ago.

I was working LG in a youth championship game in the late 1970's. The BJ and U were 2 officials I really admired.

The BJ and I converged on a pass play between us. I thought the defender broke up the play legally. The BJ called Defensive pass interference. I thought he was clearly wrong. At half time the U told him "great call, I turned just in time to see it" (He was turning to help with catch/trap call). Different angles create different views. I no longer question other crewmates view of what they saw.

Think about that next Sunday while watching the NFL. TV will provide 7 different views , some of which will show the foul (or the catch, or fumble, or OB etc)while others won't!

About experience: Me 30 Yrs, 27 Varsity, state championship in Giants stadium twice. Last week in youth game: 1st yr official with playing experience called no foul on crutical 4th down play. Coach on his sideline wanted DPI and called time out for conference with me as the referee. I told him "no foul. The covering official ruled it to be clean. It is a judgement call". The new guy was standing there ready to explain if I asked. I didn't until after the game, then I asked for training purposes. He was right on! The pass was low and between both players and they both dove for it, creating minor contact. No foul in his judgement. I didn't see any of the play but I'll bet he was correct.

Respect your crew mates and remember, if your both in the same spot on the field and have the same view, somebody goofed. If we all stayed together they wouldn't need 5 of us!

[Rich]

Originally posted by mcrowder
You keep not answering the question...

Why, in your opinion, when two officials disagree on what they saw, should we immediatly and uniformly default to the one of those two that threw a flag, and the one that saw the same action, but NOT see a foul or throw a flag, must defer to the judgement of the other... in other words, why do we assume, in such cases, that the one throwing a flag was RIGHT in his judgement call, and completely dismiss the other official's judgement call (for certainly it was judgement that caused him to NOT throw a flag)?

I've posted my opinion on why we do this, but you've not, and I'm curious to hear if your reasoning mirrors mine or supplements it.

I think it undermines the crew's credibility to be picking up flags unless it's a situation that REALLY calls for it.

The OP's post doesn't fit this criteria, IMO.

I WH on Friday nights with the same crew every week. Reading the original scenario, I'd have no problem taking my time and having this conversation with the two officials, but I'd prefer them having that conversation before I got involved. If I got there before there was agreement, I'd ask both what they saw.

If both were adamant, I'd go with the flag. I understand that there's a decision involved in both the flag and no-flag outcomes, but the flag is a positive act -- it's saying that the covering official SAW a foul. And at that point I'd be giving the preliminary signal and ending the discussion.

Being the white hat, 95% of the time, is simply working one of the five positions in a 5-man crew. This is one of the 5% where the white hat has to decide what the crew is going to do. And this is a good discussion to be having in the pregame.

--Rich

[jransom]

Originally posted by SJoldguy
...remember, if your both in the same spot on the field and have the same view, somebody goofed...

I got into this thread late and have read a lot of opinions with 1 thing running through my mind the whole time: BE IN POSITION.
Thank You for finally bringing this up.

[parepat]

Our crew works situations like these in the following manner.

1. If 1 official flags it and another disagrees we get together. The non-flagger explains what he saw. It is then up to the flagging official whether he wants to stand by his call or wave it off. If he does, we march it off and move on.

2. If we have two flags seeing it opposite ways (ie OPI v. DPI or false start/encroachment) then they both make their case to me (WH) and I make the ruling.

Thoughts?

[Wes]

I really dont have any answer as far as how to handle that one situation- just a bit of philosophy that can keep it from happening again.

Everything that happens out there are crew calls. Either WE make it happen or let it happen. Make sure you are together on philosophy (preventitive v. "flag happy" etc.) This takes time- lots of discussions, etc, etc.

Everyone has a judgement call that he wishes he could take back. You will find those things happen less and less as you work together and hammer out an idea of what you believe in.