One of the issues with the officiating.....

[UKCATSFREAK]

I've been meaning to bring this to you guys for quite some time. As some of you know, I do officiate. I do high school ball in basketball and college ball in football and I try to work very hard at the craft. With that said, I think there is a lot of problems with the way the NCAA wants their games called on the men's side. The women's side seems to have a great grasp on the job of the official in the today's game. They believe you call it by the book, straight up. The believe it's the officials job to officiate the game the same in the 1st minute as in the last minute and I couldn't agree more. Now, the men's side has different philosophies that I believe need to be changed. They almost see themselves as game managers rather than officials. I've seen and heard this at lots of camps and clinics that I've attended over the years. It's one of the biggest reasons why I've not jumped into officiating at the collegiate level in basketball. I just can't do that as an official and unfortunately, it's starting to creep its way into the high school game as well. Actually, it already has made its way into the high school game.

But anyway, I found a great piece (or pieces) of film from a training clinic that I think shows the differences in philosophies in the different games. There are several videos from the key speakers at the clinic such as Doug Shows and Debbie Williamson. As well as other high profile D1 officials and D1 Conference Supervisors. The videos are kinda long but if you get time, it's a great insight into the way they think and what I believe to be a one of the biggest issues with the men's game. It will give you some insight as to why they officiate the way that they do. Now, im not talking about just bad officials who miss calls left and right because that's just politics and inexcusable at this level. Im just talking about their philosophies on the game. It's some good video and I hope you get a chance to watch.

The 1st video that I'm posting is of Jamie Lucky speaking. He's a D1 veteran official but listen to him talk about "managing" the game and then skip to the 39:00 min mark and listen to the question that is asked. It's difficult to hear but the trainee basically says he is a bit confused by some of the speakers who are contradicting what the other says. He means that Debbie Williamson gave a speech and went over some things and then the men's speakers have contradicted what she said. Then listen to the responses from the other clinician who is another men's D1 official. Doug Shows also chimes in on the question. It's a perfect example of what is one of the biggest issues of the NCAA men's game.


Jamie Luckie:





The next is Debbie Williamson speaking, who is a D1 Conference Supervisor on the women's side. She gets it! This is the way the men's game should officiated too.





If you get time, go check out the rest of the speakers from the clinic. You can find them all on YouTube, just search "State Officials Association". After you click into one of the videos, the rest should be done under the video. Some are really good and some will make you scratch your head. It's the off season, so I thought it may give us something to do for a bit. Hope you guys enjoy it.

 

[ram1955]

The bottom line is this...officials do not call the game as the rules dictate. Thus, with no standard, there is rampant inconsistency. The game of bball stinks now compared to how it was played 20,30,40 years ago with the nba being the epitomy of how the game should not be played.

 

[Smashcat]

You know there's a problem when several of the most controversial refs are the ones who are picked to do the Final Four games. Those are supposed to be the best.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

The bottom line is this...officials do not call the game as the rules dictate. Thus, with no standard, there is rampant inconsistency. The game of bball stinks now compared to how it was played 20,30,40 years ago with the nba being the epitomy of how the game should not be played.

Pretty much, yeah. It's like they want them to be game managers rather than officials. Like the official said in the video, if Shows has a charge on 1 end then he's thinking he needs a charge at the other end. To me, that's absurd. A lot of it comes from coaches, coaches bitching about foul counts, and saying they're getting "cheated". It's almost like the want an illusion of consistency on paper after the game. They look at foul counts and see if they're equal. Well, teams are different and defend differently. Some are aggressive, some are passive, some double team in the post, some press, some play straight tough man to man. So, counts shouldn't always look the same but it's almost like that's the goal for the NCAA with the men's game. I know that coaches take part in these philosophy advisory groups and that may be what they want but it leads to officials not calling the game by the book.

 

[ulismyman]

Op...let me give you readers digest version....they suck

 

[crestcat]

It should be like ice hockey, coaches behind the bench

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

Op...let me give you readers digest version....they suck

For some reason, I'm not surprised at that comment coming from you. Seems like your posts are always the Reader's Digest version.

 

[ulismyman]

For some reason, I'm not surprised at that comment coming from you. Seems like your posts are always the Reader's Digest version.

Yes..this is definitely a post to bash me on...at least try and make it look legit

 

[Ky-troutbum]

I've been meaning to bring this to you guys for quite some time. As some of you know, I do officiate. I do high school ball in basketball and college ball in football and I try to work very hard at the craft. With that said, I think there is a lot of problems with the way the NCAA wants their games called on the men's side. The women's side seems to have a great grasp on the job of the official in the today's game. They believe you call it by the book, straight up. The believe it's the officials job to officiate the game the same in the 1st minute as in the last minute and I couldn't agree more. Now, the men's side has different philosophies that I believe need to be changed. They almost see themselves as game managers rather than officials. I've seen and heard this at lots of camps and clinics that I've attended over the years. It's one of the biggest reasons why I've not jumped into officiating at the collegiate level in basketball. I just can't do that as an official and unfortunately, it's starting to creep its way into the high school game as well. Actually, it already has made its way into the high school game.

But anyway, I found a great piece (or pieces) of film from a training clinic that I think shows the differences in philosophies in the different games. There are several videos from the key speakers at the clinic such as Doug Shows and Debbie Williamson. As well as other high profile D1 officials and D1 Conference Supervisors. The videos are kinda long but if you get time, it's a great insight into the way they think and what I believe to be a one of the biggest issues with the men's game. It will give you some insight as to why they officiate the way that they do. Now, im not talking about just bad officials who miss calls left and right because that's just politics and inexcusable at this level. Im just talking about their philosophies on the game. It's some good video and I hope you get a chance to watch.

The 1st video that I'm posting is of Jamie Lucky speaking. He's a D1 veteran official but listen to him talk about "managing" the game and then skip to the 39:00 min mark and listen to the question that is asked. It's difficult to hear but the trainee basically says he is a bit confused by some of the speakers who are contradicting what the other says. He means that Debbie Williamson gave a speech and went over some things and then the men's speakers have contradicted what she said. Then listen to the responses from the other clinician who is another men's D1 official. Doug Shows also chimes in on the question. It's a perfect example of what is one of the biggest issues of the NCAA men's game.


Jamie Luckie:

View embedded media

The next is Debbie Williamson speaking, who is a D1 Conference Supervisor on the women's side. She gets it! This is the way the men's game should officiated too.

View embedded media

If you get time, go check out the rest of the speakers from the clinic. You can find them all on YouTube, just search "State Officials Association". After you click into one of the videos, the rest should be done under the video. Some are really good and some will make you scratch your head. It's the off season, so I thought it may give us something to do for a bit. Hope you guys enjoy it.

I always thought at best, most officials are incompetent and at worst they're crooked, but what you just shared does make sense...

 

[Blueaz]

For some reason, I'm not surprised at that comment coming from you. Seems like your posts are always the Reader's Digest version.

I doubt he has a subscription.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I think the biggest problem is the lack of consistency from conference to conference. I know refs are specific to certain conferences but the same refs more or less do the same conference games. For the last 4 years, the SEC has been one of the top 5 conferences in fouls per FG attempts. It makes the games almost unwatchable at times. There's a massive difference between the way the SEC games are called vs other power conferences and you have to wonder why.

 

[BigBlueManSouthCentralKY]

Too many refs intimidated on home courts, high school and college. Too many refs that just don't call it like they see it. Most seem to think that they need to try and balance calls to some degree so they don't appear bias and possibly lose their jobs. There are bias refs, bad refs and a hand full of solid refs, spineless refs and punk refs on a power trip. I go to a lot of high school games and over time it is easy to distinguish which one of these three categories they fall in. No way of them hiding from the fan that knows the game well.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

I think the biggest problem is the lack of consistency from conference to conference. I know refs are specific to certain conferences but the same refs more or less do the same conference games. For the last 4 years, the SEC has been one of the top 5 conferences in fouls per FG attempts. It makes the games almost unwatchable at times. There's a massive difference between the way the SEC games are called vs other power conferences and you have to wonder why.

Actually, the majority of officials at the D1 level work multiple conferences and very few are strictly calling in a single conference. Now, they're not necessarily calling all D1 conferences but most of them do call in several conferences.

My original post was meant more for talking about the big time officials that call our important games through the year and in the tournament. Honestly, the SEC regulars that we get for the Missouri game or the LSU game don't really effect us much because we beat those games regardless. The SEC still brings in the top guys for a lot of our games in conference as well. Those are the guys I'm referring to in my post. You're exactly right though with your post. It's definitely an issue as well. Most of the top officials that are calling the regional finals and Final Fours are from the east coast. Not all of them but I'd definitely say the majority of them. But even the big time officials on the West Coast are trained on these philosophies as well. It makes for extremely inconsistently called games from in conference, out of conference, and across the country. It's hilarious that they're trying to just portray consistency on paper. They think the foul count is a means of judging consistency and that's a joke.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

Too many refs intimidated on home courts, high school and college. Too many refs that just don't call it like they see it. Most seem to think that they need to try and balance calls to some degree so they don't appear bias and possibly lose their jobs. There are bias refs, bad refs and a hand full of solid refs, spineless refs and punk refs on a power trip. I go to a lot of high school games and over time it is easy to distinguish which one of these three categories they fall in. No way of them hiding from the fan that knows the game well.

This! This is what I meant with my post but I'm talking strictly in the men's collegiate game. You're exactly right on that statement but it's not for the reasons you think. It's because that's how they've been trained to do the job. The philosophies used in training are what they're following. That's the problem. The Advisory committees and Rules Committees from the NCAA have set these philosophies for the officials and it's horrible for the game. There are many different people on these committees such as Coaches, ADs, Conference staff members, University Presidents, etc. People perceive the officials as being scared or being intimidated by fans or coaches but that's just perception and not reality. It just looks that way because of these philosophies they use to officiate. These have came up through the ranks and dealt with some pretty crazy fans and coaches along the way, I can guarantee you that they're not scared of the fans or the coaches. Some coaches may intimidate some newer officials just a bit at first but that number is small. They're going for "perceived" consistency rather than striving for real consistency like the women's officials. The women's game and their officials have things in order and that's exactly the mold that the men's game should follow.

 

[tf4fun]

"Perceived consistency"
So if a coach plays a physical defense,with that approach he will have a advantage over his opponent.
He gets called for several fouls, get up complain and its foul foul foul on the other team.. Makes perfect sense!

 

[St.PatterSoN-54-]

This was a good watch. Thanks for posting.

It serves to explain that referees feel the need to control the game. Luckie even says that at 42:00. The fact that he needs to control the game instead of calling what he sees is indicative of the state of the men's game. Give me the women's refs any day of the week. They call it like they see it. No more, no less.

 

[BlueRunner11]

Having officiating multi sports in the past myself, I have my own thoughts, but Id like to hear yours OP concerning the first half of the elite 8 UNC game.

Would you say that somehow fit within the framework of their philosophy or something else entirely?

 

[Blueaz]

"Perceived consistency"
So if a coach plays a physical defense,with that approach he will have a advantage over his opponent.
He gets called for several fouls, get up complain and its foul foul foul on the other team.. Makes perfect sense!

Hmmm. I like where you are going with this

 

[uky8unc5]

Here's the thing: OP's comments have been true at the highest levels of college for decades. (This I know, trust me).

Let me put it this way: Officials who call things by the book are not advanced because NOBODY enjoys a Rule-book game. That includes everyone in this thread. You might think you would, but you would hate constant whistles and how it would force muscular, athletic men to play.

Frankly, the problem lately is lack of Men with good judgment. Why, is that true? I wish I could share. But it's not because Officials are on the 'take' or games are fixed. I'll leave it at that.

 

[trinity45]

The bottom line is this...officials do not call the game as the rules dictate. Thus, with no standard, there is rampant inconsistency. The game of bball stinks now compared to how it was played 20,30,40 years ago with the nba being the epitomy of how the game should not be played.

For what a college official makes calling the big conferences, they should be able to call a better game. Officials should never be the topic after the game or during the game if they do their job correctly. Some of these officials today, Higgins included think they are bigger than the game.

 

[ram1955]

Here's the thing: OP's comments have been true at the highest levels of college for decades. (This I know, trust me).

Let me put it this way: Officials who call things by the book are not advanced because NOBODY enjoys a Rule-book game. That includes everyone in this thread. You might think you would, but you would hate constant whistles and how it would force muscular, athletic men to play.

Frankly, the problem lately is lack of Men with good judgment. Why, is that true? I wish I could share. But it's not because Officials are on the 'take' or games are fixed. I'll leave it at that.

Disagree. If the game was called by the book, players would make adjustments. What exactly is it you enjoy seeing that is not called but would be if they called it by the book? Bumping and banging? Carrying the ball?

 

[uky8unc5]

What exactly is it you enjoy seeing that is not called but would be if they called it by the book?

i appreciate the question. But let me ask: do you know the rules? Have you officiated?

When I first became an official many moons ago, my mentors (top ranked officials) told if I wanted good ratings:
- Don't call what nobody wants you to call.
- Adjust to the abilities of the kids
- Adjust to the situations etc
That is what we all want. The problem is the dilution of talented officials. And why that is true..well, I won't go there. But incompetence is the issue today...

 

[St.PatterSoN-54-]

i appreciate the question. But let me ask: do you know the rules? Have you officiated?

When I first became an official many moons ago, my mentors (top ranked officials) told if I wanted good ratings:
- Don't call what nobody wants you to call.
- Adjust to the abilities of the kids
- Adjust to the situations etc
That is what we all want. The problem is the dilution of talented officials. And why that is true..well, I won't go there. But incompetence is the issue today...

By 'adjust to situations', do you agree with Luckie that you have a responsibility to have make up calls to keep control of the game? Just curious.

 

[ram1955]

i appreciate the question. But let me ask: do you know the rules? Have you officiated?

When I first became an official many moons ago, my mentors (top ranked officials) told if I wanted good ratings:
- Don't call what nobody wants you to call.
- Adjust to the abilities of the kids
- Adjust to the situations etc
That is what we all want. The problem is the dilution of talented officials. And why that is true..well, I won't go there. But incompetence is the issue today...

Yes I know the rules and I have officiated, thought it has been many years since. IMO, the game is no longer played by the rules. It reminds me of what you'd see on a playground. Bumping, banging, pushing people around, hacking, etc....IMO, it takes a lot more talent to play the game as it should be played. Today, any 6'10 muscle bound thug with decent talent can do well in the game simply by bullying people around. Not so, back in the day.

 

[uky8unc5]

By 'adjust to situations', do you agree with Luckie that you have a responsibility to have make up calls to keep control of the game? Just curious.

No sir...'making up' a call is not necessary. But when a call is needed to keep the peace, it's not difficult to find one that you might generally have let pass by.
I realize that sounds dishonest, but it's what separates the best from the rest. Their judgment consistently is evenhanded. (unlike Higgins whom I do not respect).

 

[uky8unc5]

Yes I know the rules and I have officiated, thought it has been many years since. IMO, the game is no longer played by the rules. It reminds me of what you'd see on a playground. Bumping, banging, pushing people around, hacking, etc....IMO, it takes a lot more talent to play the game as it should be played. Today, any 6'10 muscle bound thug with decent talent can do well in the game simply by bullying people around. Not so, back in the day.

I respect your thoughts. I'm probably your Senior. I hung up my whistle 20 years ago.
But I think today's game is twice as good as back-in-the-day. I really do.

The physical nature is brought on naturally because kids are so much bigger, faster, stronger. Personally I think the dimensions of the court needs to be enlarged by 6 feet length and width. Maybe raise the rim 6" too.

 

[uky8unc5]

Yes I know the rules and I have officiated

One more thing: I think it was easier for a good official to climb the ladder to college in my time. If you were good and made the right connections, coaches in your region of the country would request you.

Today money has changed everything...and not for the good. Elite officials have super-egos and an agenda. It's now their identity (TV) and it's how they pay the bills, which can't help but cloud their judgment.

 

[UKCATSFREAK]

Here's the thing: OP's comments have been true at the highest levels of college for decades. (This I know, trust me).

Let me put it this way: Officials who call things by the book are not advanced because NOBODY enjoys a Rule-book game. That includes everyone in this thread. You might think you would, but you would hate constant whistles and how it would force muscular, athletic men to play.

Frankly, the problem lately is lack of Men with good judgment. Why, is that true? I wish I could share. But it's not because Officials are on the 'take' or games are fixed. I'll leave it at that.

I know exactly what you're saying and you're exactly right. When I say by the book, it's more of a figure of speech. A great official uses the rule book as a tool and applies it to the game. He makes calls that effect the game on a disadvantage/advantage standpoint. However, the philosophies that I'm talking about in the earlier post are when calls or decisions are made with an agenda or a narrative. Using the rulebook as a tool to officiate consistently is the job. We don't want to literally officiate "strictly" by the book, nor do the coaches, players, and especially the fans. The game would rarely have any possessions with an actual shot. There would be almost zero contact allowed and we'd be shooting FTs all night long. So, nobody wants that but they do want consistency in the game.

It's not so much from league to league where we see the inconsistency because these philosophies are taught around the country. Fans sometimes argue this point but in reality, they don't watch enough games in other conferences to know if there really are inconsistencies from conference to conference. They see a game or a few mins of a game and make that judgement off those few minutes. However, we see major inconsistencies from game to game in our conference. We could have a home game against whoever on Saturday, then go down to Ole Miss the following Tuesday and it be called completely different. So the issue is deeper than simply being a SEC conference problem, it's a national problem.


You make a great point though about fans not wanting to see the game called technically by the book. The best officials that I know are great communicators and they see the rule book and casebook as a tool for the job. Their goal is call a fair and consistent game for the entire game. Adjustment will need to be made but they are always striving for that goal. Similar calls for similar plays and their decisions are always based on a advantage/disadvantage criteria to promote consistency in the game. Those type of officials are the best to have in the game. Unfortunately, we don't have enough of those type of officials at the top of the sport. That's a whole other thread topic in itself. That ones called Politics in officiating. Lol

 

[uky8unc5]

Unfortunately, we don't have enough of those type of officials at the top of the sport. That's a whole other thread topic in itself. That ones called Politics in officiating. Lol

Sir, you know what you are talking about! I benefited from this greatly because I knew the right people...which put me on the escalator to success. And I was good enough to make good of the opportunity.

Things in my days that tremendously affected the demise of college officiating:
- 3 man crews (in one day 33% diluted talent with guys who could not carry a whistle)
- Rise of Women's basketball (GOOD THING, but further diluted talent by doubling # of officials needed.)
- Racial quotas (GOOD THING, but conferences promoted under-qualified men)
- Money (increase pay = bullet proof egomaniacs with personal agendas and bias)
- Full time Officials (travel fatigue makes it tough to be good night after night)
- FANS - Fans who demand perfection today can slow motion analyze every call (we all miss a few...even the best). But what they don't know is: Fan hatred drives away the sharpest men/women who say: "I refuse to put up with this crap." And so they move on to other things. And most often the net result: it's like the star player gets injured, and substitutes are on the floor. The quality continues to go down.

I could go on, but the net result is what we all see. Officiating has an unsolvable problem. And for a certainty, it is NOT going to get better. No clinic or recruiting program can fix it. And yet...it still is a beautiful game, huh?

 

[Cat78Scot]

One more thing: I think it was easier for a good official to climb the ladder to college in my time. If you were good and made the right connections, coaches in your region of the country would request you.

Today money has changed everything...and not for the good. Elite officials have super-egos and an agenda. It's now their identity (TV) and it's how they pay the bills, which can't help but cloud their judgment.

ala TV Teddy

 

[Cat78Scot]

I know exactly what you're saying and you're exactly right. When I say by the book, it's more of a figure of speech. A great official uses the rule book as a tool and applies it to the game. He makes calls that effect the game on a disadvantage/advantage standpoint. However, the philosophies that I'm talking about in the earlier post are when calls or decisions are made with an agenda or a narrative. Using the rulebook as a tool to officiate consistently is the job. We don't want to literally officiate "strictly" by the book, nor do the coaches, players, and especially the fans. The game would rarely have any possessions with an actual shot. There would be almost zero contact allowed and we'd be shooting FTs all night long. So, nobody wants that but they do want consistency in the game.

It's not so much from league to league where we see the inconsistency because these philosophies are taught around the country. Fans sometimes argue this point but in reality, they don't watch enough games in other conferences to know if there really are inconsistencies from conference to conference. They see a game or a few mins of a game and make that judgement off those few minutes. However, we see major inconsistencies from game to game in our conference. We could have a home game against whoever on Saturday, then go down to Ole Miss the following Tuesday and it be called completely different. So the issue is deeper than simply being a SEC conference problem, it's a national problem.


You make a great point though about fans not wanting to see the game called technically by the book. The best officials that I know are great communicators and they see the rule book and casebook as a tool for the job. Their goal is call a fair and consistent game for the entire game. Adjustment will need to be made but they are always striving for that goal. Similar calls for similar plays and their decisions are always based on a advantage/disadvantage criteria to promote consistency in the game. Those type of officials are the best to have in the game. Unfortunately, we don't have enough of those type of officials at the top of the sport. That's a whole other thread topic in itself. That ones called Politics in officiating. Lol

Instead of an obvious bias against particular teams (I've heard of another, can't remember which team 'loves' the Roofer) easily proven by modern technology.

 

[uky8unc5]

Instead of an obvious bias against particular teams (I've heard of another, can't remember which team 'loves' the Roofer) easily proven by modern technology.

The bias I saw (and yea was guilty of) most often was favoring the name coaches. In my day, one influential coach could torpedo your career. He had the power of Blackballing you from their schedule, which in effect carried over to post season opportunities.

That's the thing that officials treasure most. Not the money, but to be the one tossing up the ball in March.