First Talk, Then T - A Basketball Ref's Diary

What a weekend - Review games 2 and 3

I had forgotten how tiring these weekends are. Even though I slept in a very nice hotel and didn't need to travel too far, two games on this level on one weekend are quite a piece of work. How must it feel to do this a whole season travelling incredible distances between games as referees in the NBA or Euroleague do?

But what about the games? Both games were pretty close and had great intensity and a lot of hussle plays. Knowing the teams and their respective coaches this was something we expected beforehand. What's interesting about this, is the way we called the games, since one point of emphasis for us this season is to control handchecking against the dribbler, illegal plays away from the ball (such as moving screens from the offense or bumps from the defense to defend cuts through the restricted area), and rough play in the low-post. This is due to a trend towards more physical play and an increased focus on defense in the past couple of years. This caused a bit of confusion for both teams and referees. The rules have not changed in this area, neither have interpretations. So, what's the point then? Are we, for example, supposed to call each contact with two hands regardless of the impact it has on the game? Some referee crews embraced this idea of calling everything and "cleaning up" the games while others still tried to apply advantage/disadvantage. As I already wrote, my understanding is that advantage/disadvantage remains one of the most important aspects of refereeing and calling fouls. I think that the increased emphasis on "good and clean" defense is aimed at those referees who got too much into idea of basketball as "a men's game" where a lot of contact and even rough play should be allowed and a referee's performance would be measured by the number of no-calls he has in a game. I think that these wars of defense are unattractive for the spectators. So, call everything then. Right? No, because freethrows aren't exactly spectacular either! The art is to apply the criteria and be consistent doing it, and advantage/disadvantage is part of it!!! And that's what we tried to do. Draw a line between good, intense defense and rough play. Call everything that's illegal as soon as it has an impact on the game. In Saturday's game it worked out pretty well. Again less than 40 foul calls were absolutely enough to control the game. I've already reviewed the game tape and even found a couple of calls I'd like to get back because they were not necessary. Therefore, on Sunday I wanted to make sure I'd blow my whistle only on plays that had an impact. For example, on Saturday I had to call off an open dunk because the defender grabed the offensive player for a split second and I blew my whistle exactly at the time when the offensive player got free and dunked it home :( In addition to the application of advantage/disadvantage I was focused on our teamwork on Sunday. As I wrote in my preview the constellation (read the composition of the team) was . And unfortunately, I was right. It started right at the beginning of our pre-game conference. Our crew chief wanted to start with a pretty short review of the new rules (unsportsmanlike foul, backcourt violation, goaltending) but instead of a short recap we ended up in a heated discussion that took almost 15 minutes! Nonetheless, when we went inside I felt pretty comfortable. I was aware of my feelings towards my partners and their strengths and weaknesses and I tried to focus on my job and trust them. In the beginning this worked out just fine. The first 15 minutes were a piece of cake, but the the game became more intense and we kind of lost our self confidence and started calling too much. We didn't adjust to the game's higher intensity but made a 180 degree turnaround, now calling almost every single contact. And of course in a situation like that one's mind begins wandering again "why did HE (not) call that?" I think I managed it ok and didn't pay too much attention on my partners, but I lost a bit of focus and made a handful of stupid mistakes down the road that could have decided the game:
1. I called an offensive foul on a center, leaning into his defender while dribbling in the low-post, which sent the defender to the floor. My partners suggested it could have been a flop but I am not sure, so this will have to wait until I get a copy of the game tape.
2. Then there is exactly the same situation at the other end, and I am the lead referee again. And this time I am sure it is a flop and call nothing which causes a massive reaction from the defender, his coach and the home crowd. Instead of assessing a Technical foul for the combination of flopping and then provoking such a reaction I did ... nothing! :( Not to mention that we had already warned the team and its coach because of an earlier flop, so it would have been easy!
3. After being too strict on the defense in the 2nd quarter we tried to get back to where we started the game, but in the end we missed a couple of calls because we gambled too much and were just lucky it didn't come down to one of those calls deciding the game. Home team won by 1!

I think it's obvious that this game stood out a bit because it didn't go as smoothly as the first two games. I am looking forward to watching the DVD of this game, and then I will probably post a bit more.

So far, I am happy with the way the season started. Even though the last game was not exactly brilliant I had a lot of fun and I enjoy being back on the court after a long off-season.

One last sentence for today, I hope that you enjoy reading this and I would be glad to hear what you think about my posts, no matter where you're from or on which level you referee!!!

Cheers,
BBallRef

posted by BBallRef @ 10/13/2008 11:57:00 AM