North Dakota Preps

RedDirtFan wrote:I maintain that calling the games tighter has too many risks at this level. Most of these teams don't have great depth and nobody wants to see a kid on the bench because of the one or two iffy foul calls that put him or her there. Can you think of the last time you saw a 3 foul first half or foul out that didn't have 1-2 questionable fouls? The worst halves of high school basketball involve one or both teams in double bonus. Call the egregious stuff but otherwise let them play.

The officials' jobs are hard enough, and they already have to put up with enough nonsense. Don't ask them to make it worse for themselves, in my opinion. The only thing I'd like to see a focus on is finding some across the board consistency with block/charge. It is applied differently by different officials just as much as it is misunderstood by non officials.

Bison-Vikes #1 wrote:

maddog1971 wrote:The one set of officials really let it get physical and the others called a closer game... but that is part of the game.... Whatever they pay... double it and it is still not enough.

So in running my company, 10 of my employees show up on time at 7:00 and 5 of them decide to show up at 7:30. They all get paid equally and all have the same benefits. But hey, that should be ok because that's part of running a business? How would that make you feel? How do you think the business is going to function? How is morale going to be around that company if the rules are only followed for some of the employees?

There is a rulebook. That rulebook doesn't change because a game is in Region 1 or Region 8. One of my favorite lines from this website (believe it came from Schwab) that I use often when discussing officiating, "A foul in the first quarter should be a foul in the fourth". I will now add to that, "A foul in the first game of the season, should be a foul in the state championship game."

These two opinions are why we don't see consistency across the board in how a game is reffed and we probably won't see an improvement in them. I do strongly agree with one of these, but can definitely understand the other.

RedDirtFan wrote:I maintain that calling the games tighter has too many risks at this level. Most of these teams don't have great depth and nobody wants to see a kid on the bench because of the one or two iffy foul calls that put him or her there. Can you think of the last time you saw a 3 foul first half or foul out that didn't have 1-2 questionable fouls? The worst halves of high school basketball involve one or both teams in double bonus. Call the egregious stuff but otherwise let them play.

The officials' jobs are hard enough, and they already have to put up with enough nonsense. Don't ask them to make it worse for themselves, in my opinion. The only thing I'd like to see a focus on is finding some across the board consistency with block/charge. It is applied differently by different officials just as much as it is misunderstood by non officials.

Appreciate your input. However, what you are implying is just another extension of the “mercy rule.” You are stating teams are not deep enough, so let’s just forget about the written rules and let the refs decide who should benefit. To be honest, you are putting the refs in a no win situation. They become the judge and the jury. You are forcing them to decide who has the longer bench. That’s why it can’t be that way. Just call the game as the rule book states. Let the players decide how they want to play. If you have 4 fouls on you in the 3rd quarter, either the coach pulls you or you don’t foul. It’s not the ref’s job to decide this. That is why we have inconsistencies in reffing.

Umpires should call more strikes. Teams don't have the pitching depth with the pitching rules. The worst games to watch are when the pitchers can't get the ball over the plate.

Bison-Vikes #1 wrote:Appreciate your input. However, what you are implying is just another extension of the “mercy rule.” You are stating teams are not deep enough, so let’s just forget about the written rules and let the refs decide who should benefit. To be honest, you are putting the refs in a no win situation. They become the judge and the jury. You are forcing them to decide who has the longer bench. That’s why it can’t be that way. Just call the game as the rule book states. Let the players decide how they want to play. If you have 4 fouls on you in the 3rd quarter, either the coach pulls you or you don’t foul. It’s not the ref’s job to decide this. That is why we have inconsistencies in reffing.

I would argue that we have inconsistencies because reffing basketball is a ridiculously difficult first job (which is why there are inconsistencies at higher levels too), let alone a second or third job where each ref has a 10 to 100 mile drive home before they go to bed and get up early for their primary occupations. They are the doing the best they can, and this physical style of play doesn't prevent the better team from winning. I just don't think it's the problem that some of you do.

Flip wrote:Umpires should call more strikes. Teams don't have the pitching depth with the pitching rules. The worst games to watch are when the pitchers can't get the ball over the plate.

Not even in the same, pardon the pun, ballpark.

Most rules are set up for some interpretation by the person enforcing the rules. That is why we have Judges and Juries. I had two different game wardens explain the same law two different ways.
So as a hunter I need to figure out what is right and wrong as much as the person enforcing the law. I had the one warden say.. well ... if you think you might be doing something wrong... then you probably are.... WHAT???
Ref's call the games different because many calls in the book could really go either way. MY favorite is the Crowd Yelling OVER THE BACK..... Well what rule book does that come from? It does not. If you can jump higher than a little guy and you jump up and grab the ball and are not touching them...

maddog1971 wrote:Most rules are set up for some interpretation by the person enforcing the rules. That is why we have Judges and Juries. I had two different game wardens explain the same law two different ways.
So as a hunter I need to figure out what is right and wrong as much as the person enforcing the law. I had the one warden say.. well ... if you think you might be doing something wrong... then you probably are.... WHAT???
Ref's call the games different because many calls in the book could really go either way. MY favorite is the Crowd Yelling OVER THE BACK..... Well what rule book does that come from? It does not. If you can jump higher than a little guy and you jump up and grab the ball and are not touching them...

Interpretation is partly there, true, most notably and most visbly with block/charge (which is part of the drama of a competitive game--though the differences in interpretation we see probably vary too much). Agree with you on the push foul that is considered "over the back" by fans. I'm of the opinion that that should be a no-call, even with contact, unless the smaller player jumps first, or the contact is so extreme that the smaller player is knocked forward or knocked to the ground. But obviously I don't make the rules. None of us do.

maddog1971 wrote:Most rules are set up for some interpretation by the person enforcing the rules. That is why we have Judges and Juries. I had two different game wardens explain the same law two different ways.
So as a hunter I need to figure out what is right and wrong as much as the person enforcing the law. I had the one warden say.. well ... if you think you might be doing something wrong... then you probably are.... WHAT???
Ref's call the games different because many calls in the book could really go either way. MY favorite is the Crowd Yelling OVER THE BACK..... Well what rule book does that come from? It does not. If you can jump higher than a little guy and you jump up and grab the ball and are not touching them...

I think the rule book has done a good job of simplifying it: If the contact is illegal and there is an advantage gained it has to be a foul. It doesn't specify how much of an advantage has to be gained.

The Schwab wrote:

maddog1971 wrote:Most rules are set up for some interpretation by the person enforcing the rules. That is why we have Judges and Juries. I had two different game wardens explain the same law two different ways.
So as a hunter I need to figure out what is right and wrong as much as the person enforcing the law. I had the one warden say.. well ... if you think you might be doing something wrong... then you probably are.... WHAT???
Ref's call the games different because many calls in the book could really go either way. MY favorite is the Crowd Yelling OVER THE BACK..... Well what rule book does that come from? It does not. If you can jump higher than a little guy and you jump up and grab the ball and are not touching them...

I think the rule book has done a good job of simplifying it: If the contact is illegal and there is an advantage gained it has to be a foul. It doesn't specify how much of an advantage has to be gained.

To my knowledge it was never called "Over the back" in the first place. That isn't a rule and never has been. It's just ruled as a push right? If I push maddog1971 in the back to get the rebound it's a loose ball foul and that's it. If I jump higher than he can and get the ball first, that's not a foul. Fans have spoken that call into existence because they think they're right.

There was a time in History where the call was "over the back" there was even the Gesture for the call made by the referee, even if the player jumped higher and didn't touch the player in front on him, it was very seldom not called...with the rule change it is now a push if there is contact...I do think fundamentally boxing out was played out better than today though....now a lot of the times it is a Jumping contest

winner-within wrote:There was a time in History where the call was "over the back" there was even the Gesture for the call made by the referee, even if the player jumped higher and didn't touch the player in front on him, it was very seldom not called...with the rule change it is now a push if there is contact...I do think fundamentally boxing out was played out better than today though....now a lot of the times it is a Jumping contest

I don't recall it but what a terrible rule if that truly existed.

winner-within wrote:There was a time in History where the call was "over the back" there was even the Gesture for the call made by the referee, even if the player jumped higher and didn't touch the player in front on him, it was very seldom not called...with the rule change it is now a push if there is contact...I do think fundamentally boxing out was played out better than today though....now a lot of the times it is a Jumping contest

Fun fact, have seen this called with the gesture (arms extended above the head and hands pointing down in a follow through motion) in the past two years.

The Schwab wrote:

winner-within wrote:There was a time in History where the call was "over the back" there was even the Gesture for the call made by the referee, even if the player jumped higher and didn't touch the player in front on him, it was very seldom not called...with the rule change it is now a push if there is contact...I do think fundamentally boxing out was played out better than today though....now a lot of the times it is a Jumping contest

Fun fact, have seen this called with the gesture (arms extended above the head and hands pointing down in a follow through motion) in the past two years.

So what about the hooking down low? There were players that were taken down in the tourney due to an arm lock and restricted movement. Think it was the Rugby vs EKM game that got really rough. Isn't this a foul in High School?

What about the punches that Grafton threw on a jump ball on the floor or the parent standing up and saying if you can't handle it get off the floor. Refs eyes got really big but they never called a T.

In both of these situations refs talked to the kids but they never called any fouls. Is that because it's on TV or because your playing for a Championship?

Hooking down low is supposed to be an automatic foul. I must’ve missed the punches in the grafton game and the comment you said a parent yelled out. Pretty pathetic if that happened as stated. Are you talking about a game at state or the Region title game against NB?
.

BasketballMind wrote:Hooking down low is supposed to be an automatic foul. I must’ve missed the punches in the grafton game and the comment you said a parent yelled out. Pretty pathetic if that happened as stated. Are you talking about a game at state or the Region title game against NB?
.

The hooking started in the Rugby vs EKM game and it got really rough. 2nd day it seemed like the officials tried to taper it down.
The punches or what looked like punches were in the Grafton vs EKM game, East side of the court I believe. The fan that stood up from Grafton was only 30' from me so I heard that loud and clear.

GOPACKGO!!! wrote:

BasketballMind wrote:Hooking down low is supposed to be an automatic foul. I must’ve missed the punches in the grafton game and the comment you said a parent yelled out. Pretty pathetic if that happened as stated. Are you talking about a game at state or the Region title game against NB?
.

The hooking started in the Rugby vs EKM game and it got really rough. 2nd day it seemed like the officials tried to taper it down.
The punches or what looked like punches were in the Grafton vs EKM game, East side of the court I believe. The fan that stood up from Grafton was only 30' from me so I heard that loud and clear.

That was the role of the the grafton kid all year, try to get under as many ppls skin as possible. He is very good at it.

GOPACKGO!!! wrote:

The Schwab wrote:

winner-within wrote:There was a time in History where the call was "over the back" there was even the Gesture for the call made by the referee, even if the player jumped higher and didn't touch the player in front on him, it was very seldom not called...with the rule change it is now a push if there is contact...I do think fundamentally boxing out was played out better than today though....now a lot of the times it is a Jumping contest

Fun fact, have seen this called with the gesture (arms extended above the head and hands pointing down in a follow through motion) in the past two years.

So what about the hooking down low? There were players that were taken down in the tourney due to an arm lock and restricted movement. Think it was the Rugby vs EKM game that got really rough. Isn't this a foul in High School?

What about the punches that Grafton threw on a jump ball on the floor or the parent standing up and saying if you can't handle it get off the floor. Refs eyes got really big but they never called a T.

In both of these situations refs talked to the kids but they never called any fouls. Is that because it's on TV or because your playing for a Championship?

Just watched some 5th grade games...They already know how to do this...saw a bunch of holding and hooks..as well a push offs to get shooting space, and an occasional hip check..and flopping(it was BBall not Hockey BTW)...and of course kids that loose their freakin minds on calls or lack of.

used to be letting some stuff go such as foot shuffling or a carry...but its getting out of hand what these kids are learning at a young age...Can about imagine what this will translate too in the HS tourneys in the next few years

It's more on the coaches at that age if it's that glaringly obvious. You have to teach kids how to do everything or you have no leg to stand on. Doesn't matter how simple the coach thinks it is, at any level, if you haven't taught the thing you want them to do yourself, you can't expect it out of them.

Young kids see their parents yelling at officials, grandparents yelling at officials, the village idiot yelling at officials, NBA players whining constantly, College players whining constantly,etc... so why wouldn't they imitate what they see at every game they watch? IMO this is a societal issue more than anything else.

Youth Coaches are so important. You need a guy that does not think his son is the next NBA player and teaches the kids respect of the game. I coached youth for 20 years. I spoke with parents and the kids to let them know that complaining to the officials or me will only find you off the team or on the bench. Coach can talk to the ref's because that is my job. If parents do it... they got talked to after the game. A player did it once they got pulled.... a second time they were done and they got talked to after the game. My past players never say a thing to the officials even on horrible calls. I taught them to play the way the game is called... if they are beating the crap out of you... do it right back.... if it is a clean game..... play clean.
That is the way the state tournament was called so that is the way the kids should play... PHYSICAL.

maddog1971 wrote:Youth Coaches are so important. You need a guy that does not think his son is the next NBA player and teaches the kids respect of the game. I coached youth for 20 years. I spoke with parents and the kids to let them know that complaining to the officials or me will only find you off the team or on the bench. Coach can talk to the ref's because that is my job. If parents do it... they got talked to after the game. A player did it once they got pulled.... a second time they were done and they got talked to after the game. My past players never say a thing to the officials even on horrible calls. I taught them to play the way the game is called... if they are beating the crap out of you... do it right back.... if it is a clean game..... play clean.
That is the way the state tournament was called so that is the way the kids should play... PHYSICAL.

I get very frustrated when fans from other towns, specifically parents, act like it's the Final Four during a youth game. I don't care if it's an 8th grade game between two "rival teams" either. There's no place for that. Hit the nail on the head with the comment about the kids mimicking what they see from parents, fans, and unfortunately, their own coaches. That, above anything should be a major emphasis in those years. You can rank them: 1. Skill Development 2.Team Play/Sportsmanship 3. Outcome

If you aren't working hard on the first two and improving them, you have no reason to complain that a referee missed a call. Also, coaches that complain about EVERYTHING at the high school level. Pick your battles and stop with the dramatic over-acting at every call. Sometimes it's justified, but you become the boy who cried wolf when a miniscule play in the first quarter gets treated with the same overdone reaction as a game deciding call in the final minute. And all game long you do it at every turn. Referees and Coaches both need to get on the same page a little bit and improve the game for everyone. Kids see that kind of thing out of the "adults" in the room, then us as coaches, parents, and fans can't get all "back in my day" when they reflect what they see.

Coaches and players should go to, I'm not sure what the proper term would be...rules clinics? Not to the degree that officials have to be trained but it makes no sense to play a game where the players and their coaches know so little of the rulebook and how those rules are applied.

RedDirtFan wrote:Coaches and players should go to, I'm not sure what the proper term would be...rules clinics? Not to the degree that officials have to be trained but it makes no sense to play a game where the players and their coaches know so little of the rulebook and how those rules are applied.

Coaches have to take a test. It doesn't matter how you score though.

The thing with those tests is they aren't basic things you see in games every day. It's always obscure rules that you see happen once every five years.

Only the head coach has to take the clinic and test. It would benefit the entire coaching staff to have to do it.

Baller wrote:Only the head coach has to take the clinic and test. It would benefit the entire coaching staff to have to do it.

If they took it seriously. It may have changed, but it used to be that there was no punishment for failing the test if you are a coach. The NDHSAA would just send you a letter telling you that you really should know the rules better.
Also, it used to be that the test was mostly on arcane situations and procedural things than on what is or isn't a violation, etc... The workshops dealt more with what is or isn't a violation. My favorite memory of a workshop was when one group of referees said a step thru was not a travel and about a third of those present said it was and that they were going to call it a travel! (So sometimes even the referees are on different pages.)