Great Post By The Play Caller

[cascadedevil]

Please continue!

[DevilCastDownfromDurham]

Agree completely. Very illuminating as to how officials view a game, where they can struggle, and how they can overcome those problem areas (and how good coaches and players react to/can exploit those areas). Looking forward to future columns that do play-by-play and that deal with "big picture" issues.

[OldPhiKap]

bttt. Very interesting perspective, thanks.

[wilko]

Altho, I must confess Im not sure I understood all of it...

Its good to hear some qualified information, and gives me a different level of thought. Hopefully I'll learn something along the way.

I think this is a fine fine example of whats needed in the Sport.
Fan education.

If it looks like a duck, or acts like a duck... then it MUST be a travel, foul, carry or whatever...

but often these calls arent made when they are obvious to the casual fan. Either the rules need to be changed to something the casual fan can identify with, or rule education needs to happen. So Im glad to see this.


Some nuanced items from the discussion, that will hopefully be elaborated on in the future..

1) Concept of "advantage". I would argue that NOT making a call for a carry, travel or foul DOES constitute an advantage by virtue of its omission.

2) Game mangement for the embarassment factor. Isnt the point of keeping score to determine a victor? Why does this need to be managed? If someone looks itchy to start a fight for pride or whatever, tossem.

3) Stoppages in play are a part of the game and allow for commercial breaks... in the game current format is there ever a signal from the producer or director to the officals to stop play or go to a commercial besides the "official timeout"? Would a ref make a call they ordinarily wouldnt for the sake of going to a commercial to honor the financial obligations? Knowing this would be an extension of game and bench management.


Im a fan (cant emphasise that enuff). I watch because I want someone to win (Duke) or lose (UNC, every friggen game they will ever play).
If I wanted to see an evenly matched game full of drama an intrigue I play darts with my neighbor after a couple of beers.

Somehow I have chosen THIS as an item to hang a portion of my ego and self worth on... So I have a real unexplainable need for Duke to win.

So hopefully being better educated about things will ease my pain during a loss.... but I have no intention of being objective. Thanks for being here.

[sagegrouse]

One of the best pieces we have had on DBR in many a year -- and I didn't even see one second of the game.

(Of course, imagining a lunge by Zoubs or a stratospheric leap by Henderson is not difficult.)

sagegrouse

[pfrduke]

3) Stoppages in play are a part of the game and allow for commercial breaks... in the game current format is there ever a signal from the producer or director to the officals to stop play or go to a commercial besides the "official timeout"? Would a ref make a call they ordinarily wouldnt for the sake of going to a commercial to honor the financial obligations? Knowing this would be an extension of game and bench management.

Were this even possibly true, it would be a scandal of rather large proportion. And the refs have no financial obligations to the advertisers - it's a highly indirect connection at best. Really, this is kind of a laughable suggestion.

Also, the way that stoppages are built in pretty much ensures that no commercial break will be missed. Official timeouts occur at the first whistle with under 16, 12, 8, and 4 minutes in each half. Plus, if a team calls a timeout in the first 4 minutes of the second half, it is automatically a full length timeout. In watching hundreds and hundreds of college basketball games, I can probably count on one hand (at most) the number of times I've seen an official timeout missed because there was no whistle during a full four minute time period.

[wilko]

In watching hundreds and hundreds of college basketball games, I can probably count on one hand (at most) the number of times I've seen an official timeout missed because there was no whistle during a full four minute time period.

Yeah, Im incluined to want to believe that as well. I was rather surprised by game management on the "embarrassment" angle so I thought I would ask. I meant no disrespect to our guest columnist...

I was coming from the point of view of "How many ticky tack out of the norm calls are made right before going to break"? I mean seemingly guys that would never get a palm or carry or travel call will get one one and then they go to break.... Yet others they just continue along with the action.... It had some merrit in my mind. Not saying its a scandle or any thing " wrong" particularly...... just another vaiable to account for... Nothing more nothing less.

[hughgs]

2) Game mangement for the embarassment factor. Isnt the point of keeping score to determine a victor? Why does this need to be managed? If someone looks itchy to start a fight for pride or whatever, tossem.


I can comment on this from a volleyball perspective. It's most definitely true that most refs want teams to play a good game. And part of that is allowing teams to "get away" with fouls or what have you in order to let the team feel good about themselves.

Imagine this volleyball scenario. Team A stinks, and not in a good way. They can barely serve and serve receive looks like a Chinese fire drill. Sometimes they can set and have they one person who can jump higher than the net, but the right combination almost never happens. Team B has all the basics, meaning they can serve receive decently, set well, and can usually spike the ball if the first two occur. Rally scoring to 25 and Team B jumps out to a 15-2 lead. If Team A manages to get a good pass off of serve receive and the set goes out to their good hitter there is no way I'm going to call anything on the setter (unless it's extremely atrocious). It will possibly be the only time that Team A has something to celebrate the entire match.

[dukemomLA]

I watched the game from start to finish. Even saying that, your insights were appreciated by me! Since I (of course) TIVO'd the game, it was great to replay the game after reading your post. Again, many thanks. PLEASE keep posting!

[gumbomoop]

I, too, am indebted to Playcaller for so many insights, some of the nuances of which are, well, so nuanced as to require study. But studying P's posts are invariably rewarding.

So it pleases me no end to cite 2 of P's comments on Scheyer: (1) "Everyone should spend several possessions watching JS play post defense." In pre-season, there was some debate about Scheyer's defense. No longer? His court awareness is absolutely top-flight--better than pretty much everyone at the college level?--on both O and D. (2) Even more noteworthy is that P paused from analyzing specific plays to emote: "JS is really good at playing basketball."

Amen. So far, JS and KS are co-MVPs?

[rasputin]

Were this even possibly true, it would be a scandal of rather large proportion. And the refs have no financial obligations to the advertisers - it's a highly indirect connection at best. Really, this is kind of a laughable suggestion.

Also, the way that stoppages are built in pretty much ensures that no commercial break will be missed. Official timeouts occur at the first whistle with under 16, 12, 8, and 4 minutes in each half. Plus, if a team calls a timeout in the first 4 minutes of the second half, it is automatically a full length timeout. In watching hundreds and hundreds of college basketball games, I can probably count on one hand (at most) the number of times I've seen an official timeout missed because there was no whistle during a full four minute time period.

I was at an NCAA Tournament first round some years ago in St. Louis. The fourth and final game of the day was the 8-9 game between Stanford and Western Kentucky. It was a much anticipated game because the teams seemed evenly matched and both teams had a dominating big man. The great match never materialized. The refs called every little contact a foul, and in no time the W.Ky. center was on the bench and he was a non-factor in the game.

At the very end of the game, there had been no stoppage in play when it got under 4 minutes. (Actually, there had been stops for free throws, but the last shot was always missed, so there was a rebound, and play continued. That was before they changed the rule to have the TO before the free throws.) Finally the ball was out of bounds with one or two seconds left in the game (a very lopsided game--why was I still there?). Sure enough, they had their TV time out, with 0:01 or :02 left.

[Truth]

I can comment on this from a volleyball perspective. It's most definitely true that most refs want teams to play a good game. And part of that is allowing teams to "get away" with fouls or what have you in order to let the team feel good about themselves.

Imagine this volleyball scenario. Team A stinks, and not in a good way. They can barely serve and serve receive looks like a Chinese fire drill. Sometimes they can set and have they one person who can jump higher than the net, but the right combination almost never happens. Team B has all the basics, meaning they can serve receive decently, set well, and can usually spike the ball if the first two occur. Rally scoring to 25 and Team B jumps out to a 15-2 lead. If Team A manages to get a good pass off of serve receive and the set goes out to their good hitter there is no way I'm going to call anything on the setter (unless it's extremely atrocious). It will possibly be the only time that Team A has something to celebrate the entire match.

Are you speaking as ref for competitive volleyball?

While I understand there are human emotions at play, I still think that making an intentional call to allow a team to compete even a little bit more effectively than they otherwise would is a complete detriment to the spirit of the competition. (Obviously, this depends on the circumstances -- friendly beach match-ups vs. organized NCAA / professional competitions, etc)

Not saying I don't believe it happens, but I think it shouldn't...

[pfrduke]

I, too, am indebted to Playcaller for so many insights, some of the nuances of which are, well, so nuanced as to require study. But studying P's posts are invariably rewarding.

So it pleases me no end to cite 2 of P's comments on Scheyer: (1) "Everyone should spend several possessions watching JS play post defense." In pre-season, there was some debate about Scheyer's defense. No longer? His court awareness is absolutely top-flight--better than pretty much everyone at the college level?--on both O and D. (2) Even more noteworthy is that P paused from analyzing specific plays to emote: "JS is really good at playing basketball."

Amen. So far, JS and KS are co-MVPs?

If there was a debate about Scheyer's defense pre-season, it's only because some folks simply were blind to the fact that he is (and has been) an excellent defender. He had several games in his first two seasons where he simply shut down opposing scorers - Sean Marshall at BC, Ellington, etc. His off-the-ball defense is among the best I've seen at Duke - he does a fantastic job denying people the ball and, when they do get it, preventing them from getting it in a good scoring position. I think people remember Eric Maynor hitting the game winner against Scheyer in the VCU game and extrapolate that into this notion that Scheyer doesn't play good defense. It's been a false notion since the day he enrolled at Duke and it would be an even more false notion now.

[Richard Berg]

I don't have anything more to add, other than please get this guy to write as often as possible!

[hughgs]

Are you speaking as ref for competitive volleyball?

While I understand there are human emotions at play, I still think that making an intentional call to allow a team to compete even a little bit more effectively than they otherwise would is a complete detriment to the spirit of the competition. (Obviously, this depends on the circumstances -- friendly beach match-ups vs. organized NCAA / professional competitions, etc)

Not saying I don't believe it happens, but I think it shouldn't...

Yes, it's competitive. It's not the NCAA but it's certainly competitive. There are a lot of levels of competition between friendly beach games and NCAA matches. And it happens at a lot of those intermediate levels. I've let it go as a competitor and I've let calls go as a ref. I think one could even make an argument that it occurs at the NCAA level.

One nit-pick, the ref isn't making an intentional call. Rather the ref is letting a play go. The difference is that I would never let a net call go, but I can see not calling a border-line double contact in my above example.

As for whether it should or shouldn't happen I think you need to be on the losing side to understand. In the types of competitive matches that I'm referring to it can be embarrassing to both teams when the score is so lop-sided.

[devildownunder]

Yes, it's competitive. It's not the NCAA but it's certainly competitive. There are a lot of levels of competition between friendly beach games and NCAA matches. And it happens at a lot of those intermediate levels. I've let it go as a competitor and I've let calls go as a ref. I think one could even make an argument that it occurs at the NCAA level.

One nit-pick, the ref isn't making an intentional call. Rather the ref is letting a play go. The difference is that I would never let a net call go, but I can see not calling a border-line double contact in my above example.

As for whether it should or shouldn't happen I think you need to be on the losing side to understand. In the types of competitive matches that I'm referring to it can be embarrassing to both teams when the score is so lop-sided.

It's not up to me but if it were, calls/non-calls made for such reasons would never happen. IMO, the officials are there to interpret and enforce the rules of the game, not to try to keep scores from getting out of hand or help anyone save face. Besides, any time I've competed in anything, being awarded "pity points" has always been far more humiliating than getting blown out legitimately.

[hughgs]

It's not up to me but if it were, calls/non-calls made for such reasons would never happen. IMO, the officials are there to interpret and enforce the rules of the game, not to try to keep scores from getting out of hand or help anyone save face. Besides, any time I've competed in anything, being awarded "pity points" has always been far more humiliating than getting blown out legitimately.

How would you prevent it from happening? All volleyball calls are subjective. You have people making calls and it is impossible to make objective calls.

Were these "pity point" awarded during a volleyball match? I don't think it's fair to try and equate a decent attack (that may or may not lead to a point) in volleyball with the receiving of points in another sport.

And trust me, these aren't "pity points". I've never had a team come up to me afterwards and say they were humiliated by one favorable non-call from a 2 game match. Usually they're so excited to get that one good play that it overcomes any feeling that they are being rewarded "pity points".

[devildownunder]

How would you prevent it from happening? All volleyball calls are subjective. You have people making calls and it is impossible to make objective calls.

Were these "pity point" awarded during a volleyball match? I don't think it's fair to try and equate a decent attack (that may or may not lead to a point) in volleyball with the receiving of points in another sport.

And trust me, these aren't "pity points". I've never had a team come up to me afterwards and say they were humiliated by one favorable non-call from a 2 game match. Usually they're so excited to get that one good play that it overcomes any feeling that they are being rewarded "pity points".


I can't determine why any subjective calls are made. My point was that IF an official's thought process is "I don't really know what happened here, I'm going to give the call to the team that's behind", I think that's bad policy under any circumstances, in any sport.

[hughgs]

I can't determine why any subjective calls are made. My point was that IF an official's thought process is "I don't really know what happened here, I'm going to give the call to the team that's behind", I think that's bad policy under any circumstances, in any sport.

I would agree. However, you're changing the topic of this sub-thread. The original premise of this sub-thread isn't ignorance of some game situation, but the idea that refs try to not let other teams get too embarrassed from high score differentials. And if you read me post you will notice that at no time did I pose the situation as "I don't really know what happened ...". You're point has nothing to do with either the topic of this sub-thread or my post.

[devildownunder]

The original premise of this sub-thread isn't ignorance of some game situation, but the idea that refs try to not let other teams get too embarrassed from high score differentials.


If an official KNOWS what happened and calls it another way deliberately to help a team save face, that's even worse. I've been following and participating in sports for a long time, not at a high level but for I have been involved just the same. My thoughts on officiating are that the only reason an official should make a call is because that's what he/she believed happened. I read your original post and this follow-up comment to mean that you think it's a good idea for officials to help teams out with a call or two that they did not earn so they can keep a score close.

I am a strong opponent of such officiating. I think it belittles everyone involved and makes the contest itself less legitimate sport. If you disagree, fine, we'll disagree.

I think I've clarified my point enough here and I'm about 99.9% sure our positions on this won't change, so no more posts from me on this one.

[jv001]

I would agree. However, you're changing the topic of this sub-thread. The original premise of this sub-thread isn't ignorance of some game situation, but the idea that refs try to not let other teams get too embarrassed from high score differentials. And if you read me post you will notice that at no time did I pose the situation as "I don't really know what happened ...". You're point has nothing to do with either the topic of this sub-thread or my post.

The refs are paid to referee the game and make each call the correct way. Not to have in the back of their mind who is behind on the score board. If they don't want to be embarrassed, recruit better and practice harder. Go Duke!

[hughgs]

I read your original post and this follow-up comment to mean that you think it's a good idea for officials to help teams out with a call or two that they did not earn so they can keep a score close.

You should read my post more carefully. When you do you will notice that I gave a specific score example. And that score could in no way be construed to imply that it was a close game.

So, once again, while I agree with your general point that officials should not be making calls to keep a game close, that point is not in keeping with either the example cited at the start of this sub-thread or with my example.

[hughgs]

The refs are paid to referee the game and make each call the correct way. Not to have in the back of their mind who is behind on the score board. If they don't want to be embarrassed, recruit better and practice harder. Go Duke!

You're obviously talking about NCAA refs. I can't comment on those referees, but most of the referees in the competitive volleyball leagues that I referred to above are not payed and players aren't recruited as much as friends are asked to play on teams.

As a side note, the idea that referees are there to make the correct call was brought up in a conversation with my father sometime before Xmas. My father is/was an international grade judo referee who was tagged to referee in the Moscow Olympics so his credentials are impeccable.

Anyway we were talking after dinner and somehow the subject got on referee clinics, of which he has delivered quite a number. He asked me what I thought was the job of the referee and I replied with your answer, make correct calls, etc. Standard stuff.

Anyway, he said (in his inimitable fashion) "Wrong". Silence. More silence. "OK, dad, what is the referee's job". The refs job, according to my dad, is to use the correct process to make the call. In judo almost all calls are subjective; points, penalties, etc. So there is no way to actually know if someone if making the correct call. But, there's a process set up to help make those subjective calls.

I think that Playmaker alludes to this in a lot of his analysis of basketball games when he talks about positioning and such. Obviously the analogy is imperfect since there are more objective calls in basketball, but the ones that everyone argues about are always subjective and we should keep in mind that there is no "correct call" as much as there is a "correct process" to make the call.

[Ima Facultiwyfe]

I didn't get to finish play caller's post. (too busy putting Christmas together.) Now I can't find it. :rolleyes: Will somebody point me in the right direction on the board?
Bless your heart. Love, Ima

[calltheobvious]

http://www.dukebasketballreport.com/articles/?p=26360

Here you go.