3 Refs not a fan

I do not like it at all changes the way the game is played. The refs are calling things they have not called all year because they can see more. To me it says one of two things either 2 refs cant do the job well enough in the regular season or playoffs or first round games dont mean as much as quarterfinals. Either way it is bad policy and does not benefit the kids.

So you want 3 refs all year then? Funny how many complaints there are about how much the refs miss, then when it gets called there's complaints. Cannot have it both ways. The reason 3 are not used all year is cost although there are a few districts out there willing to pony up a few more for it. Towards the end of the year a number of games got triple coverage....

Well said Jaf.

"Can not have it both ways"

Well said.

I love having it both ways.

I love having my cake and eating it too.


The problem I have with 3 refs is that fouls that don't get called during the regular season all of a sudden are getting called because ot the extra set of eyes.

So you're saying you go both ways GNG?? Hmm.. Does Mrs GNG know?

I think there's enough referees in the state to support a 3 man system for every game. Now it's time to convince the coaches and AD's to want it. You'll probably get a 50/50 mix of those who want it and those who don't. You have to teach the game differently as players won't get away with off ball crap that does happen in a 2 man system. Ricky Oliver came and talked to the referees a couple years ago at an end of the season coaches panel - he outright said it's a different way to teach the players.

I will agree on only one thing - changing the game come playoff time seems absurd. It's like having a set of rules for the regular season and a different set for playoffs.

I agree with that 100 % JAF.

Heard from a pretty good source that 3 refs will be happening next year....frankly, I think the game improves with three officials. The players learn to adjust quickly. Now if we could just get the darn shot clock conversation shifted from pipe dream to realistic consideration.

JAF wrote:
So you want 3 refs all year then? Funny how many complaints there are about how much the refs miss, then when it gets called there's complaints. Cannot have it both ways. The reason 3 are not used all year is cost although there are a few districts out there willing to pony up a few more for it. Towards the end of the year a number of games got triple coverage....

Did you read my post you are the guys that are having it both ways, yes I want three refs all season long or not at all, you cant have it both ways either you need three refs for every game or you dont. But it needs to be the same they dont add a 4th refs to NCAA tournament games or the NBA playoffs. These are HS kids they should not have to adapt from game to game becuase of more refs. It is about the KIDS .

Huh?! Where does that come from goldenbear? I am not against 3 man. Not sure what you are implying. In general terms a 3 man is slow to be adopted because school budgets are tight - same reason as the shot clock. Most officials I talk to would be fine with a 3 man. I don't see how we (or as you put it "you guys") have any control over it. It's out of the officials control and more in the hands of the NHIAA and schools thar hire officials. Flame somewhere else please

I am not flaming anywhere , I was just trying to say it should be 3 all season or 2 all season that is should not change, because it does change the way the game is called. What I meant is kids should not have to adapt mid playoffs because of the extra ref. If you look at lot of kids were in foul trouble Friday night on stuff that is normally not called.

JAF wrote:Huh?! Where does that come from goldenbear? I am not against 3 man. Not sure what you are implying. In general terms a 3 man is slow to be adopted because school budgets are tight - same reason as the shot clock. Most officials I talk to would be fine with a 3 man. I don't see how we (or as you put it "you guys") have any control over it. It's out of the officials control and more in the hands of the NHIAA and schools thar hire officials. Flame somewhere else please

you guys as in people posting not refs,

Having it both was as in 2 verese 3, though you did say you agree with me, I am not sure why that was not your first post. Instead of being all defensive and talking about my cake and eating it to,

I am just saying in needs to be the same all year, KIDS should not have to adapt.

South Dover game South was called for 2 illegal screen up top with little contact and no advantage gain, not called all year

then Dover was granted a time out, after a scramble for the ball ( romps yelling for it when player was on the floor with it, player loses it, it gets kicked over to Cote who was wide open for three, then time out was granted, which cost them a 3 ( thank god Cote hit the same shot later in the possession) It was technically the correct call but would not have been granted in regular season because official would not have been right by Romps.

The Dover play really stood out for me, as something different would have happened with the two men crew.

NHRamFan wrote:Heard from a pretty good source that 3 refs will be happening next year....frankly, I think the game improves with three officials. The players learn to adjust quickly. Now if we could just get the darn shot clock conversation shifted from pipe dream to realistic consideration.

They will adjust if they have it all year and I think they should have it all year,

It makes sense to either have 2 refs all year or 3 all year, I don't disagree with that point. Obviously there are reasons why its hard to do that. Regardless, using a 3 man team when possible seems logical as well. A 3 ref team should have a better view of the court and get more calls right (in a perfect world).

As for the kids adapting...I'm not buying it. What is there to adapt to? A ref standing on both sidelines as opposed to one? Their game should not and will not change. I still play in a mens league where during the regular season its a 2 ref team, then in the semis and finals its a 3 ref team b/c there are more refs to go around due to less games. I prefer the 3 ref team by far, but it doesn't change how I play. There's no adapting, unless you count my ability to complain to 3 people instead of 2.

goldenbear wrote: South Dover game South was called for 2 illegal screen up top with little contact and no advantage gain, not called all year

That has nothing to do w/2 man vs 3 man crews. Top referee should have that call in a 2 man crew as well.

goldenbear wrote: then Dover was granted a time out, after a scramble for the ball ( romps yelling for it when player was on the floor with it, player loses it, it gets kicked over to Cote who was wide open for three, then time out was granted, which cost them a 3 ( thank god Cote hit the same shot later in the possession) It was technically the correct call but would not have been granted in regular season because official would not have been right by Romps.

The Dover play really stood out for me, as something different would have happened with the two men crew.

That's pure speculation, which is fine, but you don't know that he wouldn't have been granted the TO. Also, you admitted they got the call technically correct...so what's the problem? Obviously more calls are going to be made (hopefully correctly) with a 3 man crew - isn't that the goal?

"There's no adapting, unless you count my ability to complain to 3 people instead of 2."
Eliot


OMG, just perfect and SO funny. To some a 3 man crew just means an extra set of ears to complain to OR to others they complain that one member is calling all the fouls at a certain juncture of the game while 1 or the other ref isn't blowing their whistle.

I guess the key word in this thread is:

COMPLAIN

EBlessNHSP wrote:It makes sense to either have 2 refs all year or 3 all year, I don't disagree with that point. Obviously there are reasons why its hard to do that. Regardless, using a 3 man team when possible seems logical as well. A 3 ref team should have a better view of the court and get more calls right (in a perfect world).

As for the kids adapting...I'm not buying it. What is there to adapt to? A ref standing on both sidelines as opposed to one? Their game should not and will not change. I still play in a mens league where during the regular season its a 2 ref team, then in the semis and finals its a 3 ref team b/c there are more refs to go around due to less games. I prefer the 3 ref team by far, but it doesn't change how I play. There's no adapting, unless you count my ability to complain to 3 people instead of 2.

I never understood that kids adapting argument. Basketball is a game you have to play on instinct. Trust what your eyes are telling you and react. Both ends of the floor. The number of refs is irrelevant as to how you play the game. As long as the refs are in position to make the call and on the same page as to how closely/loosely
they are calling the game I am fine with 3. There still will be blown calls. Like anytime they call a foul on my kid.

The Edge wrote:As long as the refs are in position to make the call and on the same page as to how closely/loosely
they are calling the game I am fine with 3. There still will be blown calls. Like anytime they call a foul on my kid.

Another golden comment.

Awesome Edge. You found a way to complain without using the word COMPLAIN. You're good!!

As a coach, I am not a fan of having 3 Refs as they can impede and slow down the game more but I won't mind it if they use them all year and not just for the playoffs (we can adapt). What I do like is that more things do get called, especially if the game gets physical, that need to be called but that is also the con to it. There are pros and cons and we all could sit down all day and write out a Pro/Cons list that'll last all day.

Kids adapt to the loose or tight calls in a game. If the refs aren't being strict on hand checking - it gets out of control, right? When they are, the parents in the stands go crazy with "let the kids play" type comments.

Those off ball top of the key screens are actually perfect examples of a hole in the 2 man system. If the ball is up high and the screen happens on the weak side, it's awfully difficult to see it by the trail official because your primary responsibility is to watch the ball at that point. The lead "can" pick up on those; however, he/she is usually scanning the low post for transgressions. With the 3-man, that illegal weak side pick will be called more often than not. So what will happen? Well the kids and the coaches will now recognize this and adjust the plays to avoid that becoming an issue. Will it still happen sure, but the players adjustment will either be a butt on the bench or keeping things legal. Too many calls means perhaps the coach won't call for that play until the next game after the next practice and where 3 new officials will need to decide whether what they see is an illegal screen or not.

Excellent point Jaf.

In the BG - Central game there were a lot of off ball contact fouls. A few more were called last Friday than would be called in a 2 man game. That 2 man "tough to see spot" you're talking about is true in a lot of instances. BG was called for at least 4 to 5 off ball screen setting or trying to break through off ball Central screens last Friday. This is clear in a 3 man crew. In a 2 man crew, probably not seen as much.

Mind you I'm not COMPLAINING. Just adding to the stimulating discussion.

T&F - clarify something for me here. An off ball screen in and of it self is not an infraction, correct? It's been a staple of every motion offense since the 50s. How it is executed (i.e illegal screen) or fought through are the issue of the blind spot. So if a 3rd ref is in position to see it beeter then it's the coaches play calling and/or teaching of how to set or fight through the screen that needs adjusting not the way a player plays.

Edge to clarify..... I'm talking about the issue of setting an illegal screen off ball or fighting through a screen illegally off ball. When you set a screen you can't "chicken wing" a defender or stick a hip, calf or knee out to clip a defender. Conversely, when you're fighting through an off ball screen you can't push, shove or otherwise "displace" a screen setter. The 2 aforementioned infractions were called a lot in the BG victory over Central on Friday and on both teams. BG were called for a few more, but I think their "defensive style" leads to them being called for a few more. A 3 man crew catches more of these off ball infractions than a 2 man crew does.

I guess I should have said off ball "illegal" contact fouls in my original post. Hope I clarified.

Not complaining trying to make the games better, it impacted the games, more was called which changes the game. Been coaching close to 20 years all ages from 10-18, and kids do not adjust well, they are kids and they do not adjust the same as 40 year old adult. Their brains don't work the same way, males frontal lobes are not fully developed until they are 21.

They will be better prepared for the next round but still are not used to games being called tight.It takes humans 21 days to break habits, so if a kid as been setting a screen one way all year and never getting called for it then it changes because there are more sets of eyes the kid is not going to adjust the same way as an older adult that actually knows they set an illegal screen. The kid does not think they did anything wrong because they have been doing it the same way for 5 months.