Never seen before

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Obviously

And I knew that would be the answer I would get. But it does seem like there should be some mechanism to provide important information to the referees. I don't line judge a lot in HS, except during the post-season. But in my limited career, this is the second time that I've seen a non-judgment fault but been unable to help the referees.

Just seems like a flaw to me. You've got 4 very good experienced officials out there. Wouldn't you want to get that info? I know I would if I were R1.

If your R1 calls you over and asks you for information, your certainly allowed to answer whatever question is posed to you. But that wasn't really what you asked. You wouldn't give info on double contacts, right?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by FMadera

If your R1 calls you over and asks you for information, your certainly allowed to answer whatever question is posed to you.

Absolutely. But if the R1 doesn't realize that I have the answer to an important question, s/he has no way to get that info. That seems like a hole in the system to me.

You wouldn't give info on double contacts, right?

Absolutely not. But that's usually a judgment call. I'm talking non-judgment.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Absolutely. But if the R1 doesn't realize that I have the answer to an important question, s/he has no way to get that info. That seems like a hole in the system to me.



Absolutely not. But that's usually a judgment call. I'm talking non-judgment.

Touches and in/out are judgment too. Most of what we call is judgment.

Another example: If you see a player in the antenna, that's not your call to signal. But if your R1 calls you over to ask what happened, you are free to then say what you saw. The R1 can then use that information to make a final decision, you just can't signal it since it's not in your duties.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by FMadera

Touches and in/out are judgment too. Most of what we call is judgment.

I'm going to disagree with this. In/out is not judgment. It's in or it's out. It touched the line or it didn't. Touches are not judgment. The ball was touched or it was not. We might miss it, but we never say "the ball hit the line but not enough to call it in".

Doubles are judgment, because if it weren't, EVERY single overhand two-handed set would be a double. The ball NEVER touches both hands at the exact same nanosecond. We're allowed to decide if it was "close enough" to be legal. We're not allowed to decide if a ball was "touched enough" to be called a touch.

You have to understand that the vast majority of my officiating experience is with basketball. A basketball crew is much more of a team than a volleyball crew. In basketball, if my partner has important information s/he is expected to bring it to me. (Or sometimes even to blow the whistle right in front of me!) It doesn't matter if it was his/her primary responsibility or not. As a volleyball R1, if I walked off the court and my R2 or LJ told me in the locker room that he knew the game-ending point should've been four contacts, I'd be pissed.

I brought this scenario to another excellent official that I respect a lot. He said pretty much the same thing as you did. However, he said that maybe I could've put 4 fingers down by my leg, while holding the flag in my other hand to try to get the R1 to call me over. I doubt this will ever happen to me again, but if it does, I will try to remember to do this.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

You have to understand that the vast majority of my officiating experience is with basketball. A basketball crew is much more of a team than a volleyball crew. In basketball, if my partner has important information s/he is expected to bring it to me. (Or sometimes even to blow the whistle right in front of me!) It doesn't matter if it was his/her primary responsibility or not. As a volleyball R1, if I walked off the court and my R2 or LJ told me in the locker room that he knew the game-ending point should've been four contacts, I'd be pissed.

R2 and Line Judge are not the same. You shouldn't act as if they are, or that they have the responsibilities. And no, I don't have anything at all against line judges; I'm a certified line judge, and when I line judge, it's hard to get out of "referee mode," but I have to keep within the confines of what my responsibilities are for that match.

If your R2 didn't give you this information, by all means, be upset. The line judge simply does not offer this information unsolicited. That doesn't mean you can't answer the question if asked. But you wouldn't offer up a net call either, even if you saw it.

Again, if the R1 calls you over and asks what happen, you can sing like a bird. But it is not the job of the line judge to insist on it, as it wouldn't be the job of your scorer in basketball to tell you about a foul or double dribble.

You can continue to disagree, and that's fine. You asked, I'm giving you an answer based on experience. Up to you what to do with it.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by FMadera

You can continue to disagree, and that's fine. You asked, I'm giving you an answer based on experience. Up to you what to do with it.

Felix, I'm not disagreeing with your answer. As I said in my very first post, I was 99% sure that's what the answer would be. What I am saying is that I feel like there should be some mechanism to get critical, non-judgment information to a referee to avoid a similar situation.

There's SO much responsibility on the R1 to call so much of the court. It just feels like we're limiting ourselves unnecessarily by not providing a way for the R1 to get information.

I just thought of this analogy. (So it might not be a very good one, but here goes.) In the Saints/Rams NFC Conference Championship game, near the end of regulation, when an OBVIOUS defensive pass interference foul was not called on the field. But there was nothing to do about it because PI is not reviewable by rule. There was an obvious call to be made, but there was no mechanism that allowed the officials to access the information to correct the call.

My play is exactly the same. There's an obvious call to be made, somebody HAS the necessary information, but the system doesn't allow the official to access the information.

Almost everybody realized almost right away that the NFL situation was ridiculous. Yet, we're fine with it in my situation. It just seems like there could be some fine-tuning.

I don't even know what the fine-tuning would be. I just hate the idea of getting to the locker room and realizing I missed a call when somebody on my crew could've saved me.

[FMadera]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Felix, I'm not disagreeing with your answer. As I said in my very first post, I was 99% sure that's what the answer would be. What I am saying is that I feel like there should be some mechanism to get critical, non-judgment information to a referee to avoid a similar situation.

There's SO much responsibility on the R1 to call so much of the court. It just feels like we're limiting ourselves unnecessarily by not providing a way for the R1 to get information.

I just thought of this analogy. (So it might not be a very good one, but here goes.) In the Saints/Rams NFC Conference Championship game, near the end of regulation, when an OBVIOUS defensive pass interference foul was not called on the field. But there was nothing to do about it because PI is not reviewable by rule. There was an obvious call to be made, but there was no mechanism that allowed the officials to access the information to correct the call.

My play is exactly the same. There's an obvious call to be made, somebody HAS the necessary information, but the system doesn't allow the official to access the information.

Almost everybody realized almost right away that the NFL situation was ridiculous. Yet, we're fine with it in my situation. It just seems like there could be some fine-tuning.

I don't even know what the fine-tuning would be. I just hate the idea of getting to the locker room and realizing I missed a call when somebody on my crew could've saved me.

Perhaps the best takeaway here is include that in your prematch discussion, how to convey information in an unorthodox situation. I include, for example, as R2, how to tell my R1, "Look, I'm pretty sure there was a touch, but I'm not wanting to go alone on this, so if you have the same feeling, call touch, and I'll deal with the coaches."

Maybe if you can include these questions/answers in your prematch, it might help to lower the probability of something like this happening in your match in the future. Good lesson for everyone.