i think that is good - it gives everyone a better feel for the game and the players know what the ref is looking at and keen to enforce. Prefer that than just stopping the game - unless it is an obvious infringement

One warning then ping em. Same goes for the refs. One warning about weak reffing and bye. Refs so far this season haven't been able to keep up with the higher level of play.

The refs haven't been able to keep up with the level of play since the NBL became professional and they didn't, which is to be expected.

There's nothing different about this season but the philosophy they're being told to implement by the new boss is making things more inconsistent.

One thing that is bugging the heck out of me is when the one ref who plainly can't see what is happening, calls a foul based on what he thinks is happening, and the other two just let it ride.
There seems to be a code of conduct that if your fellow ref makes a blatant mistake, you don't correct him in public. I can't recall if this was always the case. Surely that negates part of the reason of having 3 refs?

Classic Example: Two players were facing inwards, one behind the other, and the player behind was reaching forwards. The player in front literally grabbed the arm and yanked it down across their body (like they were going to perform a Judo throw) and held the arm there for a few seconds.
One ref was directly behind the players, so all he saw was the rear player wrapping their arm around the other. The baseline ref and the opposite side ref could clearly see what happened and made no call. Yet the ref who couldn't see squat called the foul on the player whose arm was held.

i would think if you counted the number of calls made in a game, them looked at the number of blatantly bad calls, the refs may??? be better than we think.

In the NBA this doesnt happen.
They are instructed not to "preventative officiate"

As you said.. its a form of coaching, hoping to improve the visual aspect for the spectators to avoid unnecessary distruptuions to the game.

It works as long as you back it up. We've had 13 rounds of the refs saying "hands out" and the players keep putting their hands in and not getting called.

If they said hands out then pinged players when they put their hands in it would be much more effective.

Thats what I can't work out. I've got no problem with the "coaching" by the refs but if they aren't blowing the whistle if their instructions aren't followed, what is the point?

But hey, they've sorted out the untucked singlets and lane violations so that must bump up their stats in some way...

Every time I hear a ref call out "hands..." I want to either punch them in the head or punch my screen.

It is totally unnecessary - it demonstrates a lack of respect to the players.

I just hate the refs yelling at all - if they're yelling out to the players then their whistles are too far from their mouths, which makes it a bit hard to blow the whistle in time.

Given that the referee 'coaching' doesn't seem to work, I just wish they'd go back to enforcing the rules with whistle in mouth.

The players don't seem to take the rules too seriously, so maybe it's time for the refs to re-establish the limits set by the rules.

I agree with one think on this thread, that is where referees have an option to yell out continuously and warn players about holding or whatever, they should just blow the whistle and get on with doing their job!

One warning or making a point of emphasis is fine, but at any senior or high junior ranking competition they just need to do their job, leave the coaching to the coaches.

It prevents officiating, that sounds like an oxymoron...

It's meant to stop from happening, but at the moment it's just stopping them from being called.