I saw this the other day and it hasn't improved much on second reading.

I don't see a lot of what Scott is talking about actually happening, particularly the unsportsmanlike stuff, though I do think they are getting better policing moving screens, which interestingly is seeing screens being set &/or used better, since the problem is most often caused by the dribbler/cutter not taking the defender onto the screen.

However, I am really struggling with 'make sure we don't just react to contact' and 'making the call too quickly'. I'm hearing that as the refs being instructed to make subjective judgements about effect, which I see as one of the problems because it complicates the decision-making process.

And a call/no call has an impact well beyond the particular incident or play.

The rules provide for five illegal contacts/plays [fouls] per game for any player before s/he has to leave the game. Fail to call one and that player has opportunity for six illegal acts, and so on.

Upshot of that is that it is common to have players who violate the rules multiple times but, because calls are missed or the officials make decisions not to call the illegality for whatever reason, are still in the game when they should be back on the bench considering how they might play within the rules in future.

So while an illegal act might not have a direct impact on a specific play, failure to penalise that illegality with a foul as per the rules means the player is able to stay in the game when s/he shouldn't be there, according to the rules, and that certainly has an impact on the game even if the specific act in the particular play phase is considered 'inconsequential'.

As I've said previously, the rules - including the provision for a limited number of fouls - are written to ensure a fair game and there is a lot to be said for sticking with them, including calling all illegal acts the officials are able to see.

The players will soon change the way they play and the coaches what they coach if the infringements are called consistently, rather than let go for fear of the official being 'too quick' or some other reason.

refs r shocking. guess half the calls and miss obvious ones.

Someone needs to tell the refs we don't use the NBA goaltending rule.

Strange goaltending calls, AJs one was called and wasn't, and Kay's one wasn't called and was.

AJ hit the rim as he hit the ball, the whole support moved, it was a correct call for mine.

He hit the rim on his follow-through. It had zero effect on the result of the shot, the ball was long gone.

I disagree. His hand hit the ball as it was sitting on the rim, the contact was either at that point or a split second after.

He hit the ball first. Once he'd hit the ball it was never going in, therefore hitting the rim had no effect on the shot, therefore no violation.

Anyone see the irony in a discussion about refereeing becoming an exchange about a single violation?

Talk about not seeing the forest for the trees.

Kobe, having watched the replay from behind the backboard, I think he hit the rim as he was tapping the ball.

One thing is clear though, it was a judgment call on the timing, not a lack of knowledge of the rule as you made out.

Can't imagine anyone I'd rather see in the drivers seat of the Refs program - for too long we've had ineffectual leaders influencing shitty ref culture and not focussed enough on development so now Scotty's stuck with the shit end of the stick until he can get the next generation trained up enough to step in. You only need to look at the "retirements"/panel movement to see the people who can't hack the accountability.

I give him another season before he has them in line, probably grooming up Aylen for the top job handover when he's tired of dealing with the endless crap from the fanatics/old Boti boy.