Referee Incompetence Thread

[jbeecham]

Slight change in subject. Can anybody explain the rule on charging?

In the second Kings game, Amare was driving around his man, the guy jumped in front of him without being even close to setting his feet and Amare was called for a charge.

1. Doesn't the defender have to his feet set?

2. Doesn't the defender have to stand straight and not lean into the path of the offense player?

3. Doesn't sticking out the legs constitute "tripping" rather than taking a charge?

You're forgetting the real reason it was called a charge........because it was Amare doing it. The refs have a bullseye on his jersey and calls fouls on him they'd never call on any other 1st team all-nba player in the league. His block last night looked pretty clean on replay, but it was called a foul. If Tim Duncan, KG, Yao, etc makes that play then it's not called a foul.

 

[YouJustGotSUNSD]

Feet do not have to be fully set for a charge to be called, not sure about specifics of everything else

 

[azirish]

Feet do not have to be fully set for a charge to be called, not sure about specifics of everything else

Yet they have to be set for about 3 seconds Amare tries to take a charge.

The degree of "set" seems to be mysterious. You can't still be moving in space can you?

 

[Errntknght]

At one time they said that a defender's feet had to be set before the offensive player left his feet - the reasoning being that he couldn't change his course to avoid the defender. I'm not sure the rule was written that way but the announcers spoke as though it were. Now it is not called that way or even spoken of that way - the rule now seems to be that the players feet have to set and outside the 'circle' on impact. Recently one of the announcers said that the defender didn't have to be set if he was moving backward but he could not be moving sideways at all - yet another loophole for subjectivity.

I hate that dang 'circle'. Sometimes the refs ignore it and other times all they look at is the circle and ignore everything else. The whole idea of the circle is to make the call less of a judgment call but the trouble is that a ref can't watch for two things at once so the calls are more subjective than ever. I wouldn't say the Suns get regularly screwed by the way its called but it sure seems like Amare never gets a break. On that or any other call...

 

[pokerface]

Why dont you guys get jobs as refs? Then we wont ever have to worry about blown calls again....especially as far as the Suns are concerned!

 

[azirish]

Obviously being a ref is difficult, but lack of clarity in the rules makes it impossible for players to avoid problems. How can you tell Amare to avoid fouls if you can't tell him what a foul is?

 

[Errntknght]

In high school I used to referee very low level basketball games and I wasn't very good at it, to tell the truth - there were constantly things that may or may not be fouls and it seemed like a couple more would happen while I was trying to make up my mind about the first one. Anyway I do appreciate the difficulty of the job the refs do - and you'll notice that I often talk against things that make the refs jobs harder. To me the 'no-charge' circle is one of them because it gives them an additional thing to watch for. I thought they did a better job when they simply watched the play and made their call with no pretense of it being objective.

 

[timmo]

Does anyone think a fourth ref would help?

I mean, three old guys trying to see EVERYTHING that ten very athletic guys do running around at light speed? (edit: Add both benches too. We gotta keep an eye out for Timmy laughing) How can they see everything? But then I think, do I want them to see everything? I think games would slow wayyyyy down if EVERY foul was called.

 

[Mainstreet]

I think three referees is plenty. I am now starting to wish they would revert to the old days. When they missed a call on one end of the court they would make up for it at the other end of the court. Everyone knew what they were doing and the referees tried to make it as fair as possible. However, if your talking about a 4th referee to man the cameras I wouldn't mind that at all. The referees then could consult the 4th referee on a questionable play.

 

[JCSunsfan]

I think three referees is plenty. I am now starting to wish they would revert to the old days. When they missed a call on one end of the court they would make up for it at the other end of the court. Everyone knew what they were doing and the referees tried to make it as fair as possible. However, if your talking about a 4th referee to man the cameras I wouldn't mind that at all. The referees then could consult the 4th referee on a questionable play.

I agree with this, but many on this board don't. In essence, its an instant replay for basketball. I still like the idea of giving coaches the opportunity to challenge calls--maybe two a half--with a timeout lost if it goes against you. I don't think it would disrupt the flow of the game that much and would give a coach some recourse when the call is really critical.

Its the NBA, it moves fast and refs are human beings. Bad calls are going to be part of the game. The opportunity to challenge also make a difference if you have had a problem with corrupt refs. It takes the game out of one man's hands (to a certain extent).

There would be side benefit to it. For coaches like Popavich that contest every call--no matter how correct it is--the ref can simply look at him and say "Are you challenging the call?" Pop would have to risk a timeout or shut-up. It would cut down on the abuse refs take.

 

[BC867]

Why dont you guys get jobs as refs? Then we wont ever have to worry about blown calls again....especially as far as the Suns are concerned!

Nah, there are enough amateur refs in the NBA.

 

[LV-Suns]

This might be the longest thread in the history of the board by the end of the season.

 

[azirish]

There is a huge difference between the rules and the reality of the game, but the result is a lack of consistency.

For example, hand checking and other contact against perimeter players is classic problem. Clearly they are not calling hand checking on a consistent basis, but if not, what exactly is the NBA looking at when grading officials?

How much contact does it take for a foul to get called when a guy is under the basket? I've seen Amare get mugged by three guys with no calls while contested layups get called with almost none? It doesn't take clearly bad calls to change the results of a game, just leaning one way or another on ref discretion calls.

BTW, if there was going to be extra refs, I would suggest they go to two mobile refs and two guys right under either basket. The under the basket refs could specialize in watching for three second violations and the charge ciricle so the mobile refs can focus on the above the rim contact.