unfortunately not everyone is of a single mind set - one wants it one way and one the other

i feel it is about trying to get on the same page

The travel is the call that needs to be addressed. the physicality is no problem as it the same for both teams.
and can be challenged by coaches during the coarse of the game.

Travelling is so fundamental to the sport. The driving off on your pivot foot is the most usual mistake.

Indiana, I agree with you however the game is umpired on advantage / disadvantage and now even for travels, the umps have to decide if they player has beaten the defence or not???

if they travel but it does not help them (in the back court for example) umpires are encouraged to let it go.

i think most players at a high level understand this and play to what the umps call

most of the time :-)

I think most referees try to implement, the best that they individually can, the principles of ADVANTAGE / DISADVANTAGE. Some can implement them better than others.

And what a coach may see as a DISADVANTAGE might actually be an ADVANTAGE for their team. Why call a hands foul in the back court on a full court pass that goes straight to the open player for an easy lay-up? Or would you rather the referee call the foul, cancel the basket and go into the backcourt to start the play again?

If the pass didn't reach it's target, then by all means, the referee should call the foul, as the team has been put at a DISADVANTAGE. However, if an ADVANTAGE has been gained, in their favour, why bother calling it.

As I said, I think most referees try to implement, the best that they individually can, the principles of ADVANTAGE / DISADVANTAGE. It's just that some can implement them better than others!

Refs should not take anything into consideration except the current play, other than to ensure that the way they call THAT PLAY is consistant with similar plays called earlier.

The ref manuals state that the refs should never consider the number of fouls called on a team and/or player in determining advantage/disadvantage.

Hope that helps eliminate the "why not call the foul on them, so that they get in foul trouble" arguments.

Bruce so are you saying that if a team is down 10 - 88 with one q to go, the umpires would not consider this when determening that the team which is loosing is likely to loose the ball easier with contact and therefore call less fouls on them (go easy on them)

I am sure refs would do this wouldnt they

I might not be one to comment as I am not a basketball ref but I do ref another sport at a high standard.

At the higher levels, you are instructed to let the game flow and make calls that have an impact on the game. Refs are constantly making decisions every second of the game as not blowing the whistle is also a decision.

Speaking for myself, I am unaware of the amount of calls I make per game and often do not know the final result until the game has finished.

The higher the standard, the quicker the game happens. Sometimes as a ref you are caught out of position or you might be in the right position and a body moves in your field of vision so you miss a call. You also do not want to over ref a game as it becomes more frustrating for players and that is when the game gets out of control.

As I ref, I admit we will miss calls and make a call that people disagree with. Our role is to manage the game to the best of our ability and administer the game in a professional manner.

One thing that is a stand out with basketball ref's in SA is the lack of communication with coaches and players in the game. Ref's have taken the approach of shut up shop and do not speak to anyone. This might be because coaches abuse the ref and automatically the ref gets their back up. Before a game, I will go and speak to the coaches and also the playing group if possible to tell them what we have been told to look for this, what I will be looking for and any questions they might have. I know this would not work at a Junior level, but at the higher level (which this thread is based around) it assists with the playing group.

In answer to egalitarian whom started this thread, my personal opinion is a ref must manage the game to allow for flow and the good intention of the rules to be administered. The ref should be heard and not noticed.

What sport are you umpiring, is it the same philosopy as basketball and is it national or just micky mouse

The rules are always changing and being developed. Some rules come in change the way the game is played but dont achieve the result they were intended for (eg. 1 for 1 on 7th team foul), others have stuck around for years and have slowly become modified (eg Cross court, which then became passing back, 30 second shot clock then 24 second clock). Every time the rules change the officials have to change the way they ref just like the players and coaches have to adjust.

One thing is clear, the referees don't make the rules, they just manage them. The referees didn't all sit down one day and say 'lets not call fouls anymore unless they impact on the game'. The game changed and with those changes was an instruction to referees to apply the rules of advantage / disadvantage etc.

FIBA modifies the rules to ensure basketball can be played by everyone in the wider community. They also try to make the game a better spectator sport to allow the people who might not be able to play to receive some sort of enjoyment. This is all done by FIBA, who have played, coached or officiated at the highest level and probably have a better grasp of 'feel for the game' than all of us.

I might be anally retentive but I cannot see that laziness can be condoned. On many occasions in NBL I have seen the defender not even step out of court to pass in the ball after a score, I have seen guards stop with the ball sitting on their hip before starting off dribbling again and seen four step lay ups all without a whistle being blown.

I believe that if the refs invigilated the rules it would not take too long before the players would realise that they would have to change their ways and not be so slack. These things do not impose on advantage for the team with the ball, maybe the opposite.

Anon #73949 - how refreshing to see personal slagging hidden behind anonymity.

None of my comments came from personal opinion - merely FIBA publications.

Get your facts straight.

As to my knowledge of the game - I have been playing for 30+ years, and have been members of teams in the 80s/90s that won div 2, but were not allowed to play ABA/div1 merely due to BASA's protection of the member clubs.

Yes, I'm way past my prime now.

Have a nice day.

Bruce, I agree with you there is no need for personal attack however Referees should be seen and not heard, so you dig your own grave a little when you get involvoed with this sort of discussion.

and remember not every call is made from the rule book.

some calls would be made by your head and all that experience playing div2

my opinion is that adv/dis adv is here to stay so we should get with the times and except it!!!

Bruce is not the greatest referee in the league but in my opinion he is the best communicator of all the referees, as a coach I always know where I stand with Bruce, and I believe that Bruce knows where he stands with the coaches. If a coach or a player is out of line they will be told but also given a chance to explain their discontent with a situation. If he misses a call he will admit it and he doesn't act like he is above the game.

Often times I am criticised for "having a go" or abusing the officials, that is true I demand a level of excellence from the officials but I am also the first to defend an officials call to my players on court. I have serious issues about the advantage/disadvantage rules as I believe they are too often used to cover the fact that the referee has missed a call or too scared to make a call in a situation. I heard a referee say this week "she got rid of the ball before the foul" this makes no sense to me as the pass was knocked out of court by the opposing team, sure it wasn't a turnover but why not call the foul there is no advantage or disadvantage it that situation

Referees wont get in the way of the game if they roll with it become a part of it without trying to take possession of it. Talk to the coaches but dont justify your calls, there is only one way to answer concerns without any chance of a comeback from a coach. Be in the right spot to to make the right call, make the call and dont second guess your call and when the coach calls you up on it walk over and tell the coach that you were in the right spot and made the right call. I would hope that coaches would not continue to argue after that explanation (I would hope I wouldn't) Being a good referee is easy, be open to criticism, but frim on abuse, the higher the level the thicker your skin needs to be, talk to the participants of the game coaches as well, but dont go looking for friends (you probably wont find any anyway) the only time referees try to justify a call is when they got it wrong and they are trying to save face. and most importantly be athletic enough to run the floor and be in the right spot at the right time.

Call the game as you see it ladies and gentlemen, the coaches will have a spit (thats part of their job), but at the end of the day we will respect the referee that that communicates without being condescending or falling back on someone elses interpretation of an arbitrary rule.

Some good points Glen.
I want to ask you about two of your points though......

"being a good referee is easy" have you done it?? and are you sure you think it is easy.

wouldn't you prefere the ref to explain how he/she saw the play rather than simply tell you they were correct???

also, maybe with the feedback you have given on here it would be good for you to attend one of the pre season meetings where all coaches are invited but never ever attend.........

this would stop the abuse in which you openly admit to being a part of at times.

remember not all referees are going to be the best comunicators depending on the level they are at in there development.

cheers

"Glen", here, here communication is the very important. Too many refs are just cockheads. All refs could learn from the mal coopers, bruce northcotes or even john beames of this world.

73949, who are/what level are you playing at? Assuming you play Div 1 or 2; sorry but playing local basketball doesnt make you the basketball god or the judge referees either. Get a grip mate you play in a league for free, where the average age would be 22/23 because once most of us finish uni we get a job that pays and new priorities.

Big but,

Yes I was a referee back in my day and I was terrible, I wasn't mature enough to listen to the advice I was given, I was a cockhead referee (I remember giving a coach a tech foul with 3 seconds to play. in a 1 point game, I quit shortly after that) I dont give advice cause I was a good referee I give advice cause I now know what I (as a coach) consider a good referee to be.

As for how the ref saw the play should be told by the call they made, example:

Referee: **Tweet** travel Souths ball
Coach: what?? that is a terrible call
Referee: Coach I was all over that play she moved her pivot foot
Coach: (no response of any intelligence)
I think it is clear that the referee saw a travel, how he/she saw it is irrelavant cause I know they wont change the call if they are wrong.

I would be happy to attend these meetings however to my knowledge I have never been invited to one.
I have also asked to take the top level referees course to be informed of how the referees have been taught but I have been told I couldn't attend top level courses without going through the levels, and quite honestly I cant afford to spend over 20 hours going through the courses when I have no interest in refereeing again.

As for stopping the abuse I dont abuse to be a prick to the referee, although it may come off that way. I dont take anything from the game as personal (anymore) like it or not the ABA level is professional and should be treated as such, there are no grudges in basketball, bad calls are made, coaches are asses, players leave clubs, coaches poach players, players quit, coaches are fired. It's all business not personal. I will argue calls, I will say that a referee is not calling it both ways, and I will tell a referee when I think they are wrong, but I try to keep it in the framework of the game, I dont get tech fouls that much because most referees have a decent understanding of the game and understanding what my complaints are (that doesn't mean that they agree however). What comes off as abuse are the situations where a referee refuses to talk to me when I ask, so I feel I have to yell and carry on like a jack ass to get a conversation.
Will my "abuse" stop? probably not but it wont be personal just game related.

And as for all referees not being the best communicators, I am refering, solely, to ABA standard I think I am justified in demanding a higher level of maturity and game sense. I dont expect any green shirts out on saturday nights.

During the Summer season I did get a tech foul for swearing at my assistant coach (my language gets a little colourful during games, ask the starplex bench) I believe I said to my assistant we are playing terrible fu!@#ng offense. When I asked the referee why I got a tech and not a warning (as I didn't abuse anyone with my language) he refused to walk over to me to explain that he felt it didn't matter who I swore at, it was inapproiate. (fair comment) he made me walk out to centre court (which is a tech-able action) to have that conversation. I didn't argue the tech (as it was a fair call) but it would have been a mature gesture for the ref to come and explain when asked during a stoppage in play.

Hope that answers some of your concerns.

All good Glen, it sounds like you would be a good coach to get along with.

I am a referee and player though I have never worked a game on one of your teams.

I agree advantage disadvantage is there for a reason - not to stop the flow of the game but should not be used as a excuse for missed calls.

I still think you and other coaches should all attend the pre season meetings and perhaps it will make it easier for you to understand what the refs have been instructed to do during the season.

there are too many coaches thinking they can question every call the umps make during the course of the game.

perhaps you could give Neil Poulton a call who I have heard is a good guy and big on communication with coaches.

Anon #73874 the answer to your question is Football. Is out philosophy different? An umpire/ref must definitely be able manage the boundary  in relation to the laws and their application and the umpire is both a leader and manager on the field. I will let you decide that one.

I also know that ABL and NBL refs talk to the coaches, but what about the playing group?

Glenn is right in what he is saying. Basketball umpiries must have thicker skin then most other sports. Good communication is one of the most important factors and to be positive in the call you have or have not made. As soon as a coach or player identifies a weakness in a ref then they will go after it. We see this all the time at junior levels where the ref's are still finding their feet in the game. NO ref should have to justify a decision but pointing out how they came to a decision gives everyone a better understanding.

Yes a ref can not foul out a player on a football field. Yes a ref can not send a player out of the game nor give a player a tech foul. My understanding is that a ref does not have to worry about if a player is reaching the max amount of fouls they are permitted in a game, which is the player's job and coaching staff.

My opinion is that refs must have a sound knowledge of the laws of the game, make good position, focus on the right things at the right time, remain calm and composed, treat players with respect, communicate and penalise actions and not personalities. Should this type of philosophy change when it come to different sports? I can not answer that one true or honest as I have never umpired a basketball game.

Big But, I believe that I am a good coach to get along with but a pain in the butt as well, I do appreciate the job the referees do and will continue to be a supporter of the grey shirts, (even the zebra shirts), and as long as referees come out with a attitude to develop with the game and continue learning no matter what level they are at it will be good. As a coach I am learning every time I step on court, Players and coaches need to adapt to the refereeing but the participants deserve the referees to adapt to the game as well.

Here is the secret...coaches and players listen to referees because they have to or they will be tech fouled or disadvantaged by a style of game they adapt to, referees listen to players and coaches because they choose to make the game better and want to continue to learn and be better referees

I think that will put the emphasis on better communication all round.

Have a good round 3 everyone.

Glenn

I see the problem with the advantage/disadvantage interpretation being that it is interpreted differently both each individual ref.

Two refs, same game, different interpretations, especially at junior district level.

This can cause trouble on the court as players can get frustrated and take frustrations out on the opposition.

I'm not saying it shouldn't be used, but at junior district level, and definitely in social ball, i think it should be discouraged from being used.

pickles, thats a fair comment, but its at social level etc where you get blowouts and refs are more likely to say, not call a small back-court travel by the team losing by 54 points. It can be frustrating, you just have to workout how the refs are calling the game and play by their rules, thats what takes skill.

Fair enuff VC, but my main point is, (using your example), that one ref won't call the travel, and the other one would. This is where differences in call consistency causes issues.

its a difficult situation all-round. :(