In critical moments during basketball games, foul calls can make a big difference. Shooting fouls can give the other team an opportunity to add points by taking free throws, giving them more chances to score and win close games. In the playoffs, where both teams are often equal competitors, extra free throw attempts can mean the difference between a win and a loss, and ultimately, advancing or getting knocked out all together.
Officiating in basketball is more subjective than in any other sport. This leads to problems at all levels of the game, but most visibly in the NBA. In a sport like baseball, umpires have much more objective things to look for when making calls (except balls vs. strikes, which is pure subjection). In baseball, umpire decisions like safe vs. out or fair vs. foul are fairly black and white. Did the runner reach base before the first baseman caught the ball? If so, then the runner is safe. If not, then the runner is out. In basketball, almost all of the calls that an official has to make are very subjective. Did the defensive player get his feet set in time for the play to be called a charge? Did the defensive player make negligent contact to the offensive player on a shot? What really defines a shooting foul vs. a no call? These types of decisions are made on a situation by situation basis, with different refs making the call every time. Officials are given the discretion to make the calls as they see them. It's extremely hard for officials to get every call 100% correct because they all have different interpretations of the rules.
Flopping seems to be more and more of a growing problem in the NBA. Like in soccer, players are beginning to intentionally feign contact where wasn't any and fall to the ground dramatically to get the call from the ref. Flopping may result in more points for your team, but the act isn't performed in the essence of sportsmanship and fair competition. In basketball, hitting the floor when you're not driving to the basket isn't a common occurrence, so there's pressure on the refs to blame someone for hitting the floor. Not making calls during these situations results in scrutiny of referees because fans and spectators want to argue that their player was pushed to the ground intentionally by an opposing player. Monday night's Game 4 between the Boston Celtics and Miami Heat gave us some great examples. During two separate situations, two players from both teams fell to the ground at the same time, pressuring the refs to call a foul on one of them. In the first play, Kevin Garnett and LeBron James fell under the basket. The officials ruled that Garnett fouled James, even though they appeared to be tangled together and brought each other to the ground. The second instance happened later, when virtually the same thing happened between LeBron James and Mickael Pietrus, only this time, James was called for the foul. Both calls probably shouldn't have been made, as it appeared that both players fell in efforts to assert position under the basket, with no player actually instigating and pushing another player to the floor on purpose. This illustrates the point that officials are compelled to make a call because there was some form of contact and two players fell. During these types of situations, referees should be more aware and assess whether this was an instance of letting the players play and not calling anything.
LeBron James and the Heat have also been scrutinized for their behavior in recent games. Like fans, players and coaches also get frustrated about the inconsistent and spotty accuracy of officiating. This has lead to visible displays of disbelief and disappointment by players during play of the game. Rajon Rondo pointed this out in a surprisingly honest halftime interview during Game 4 when he said the Celtics were exploiting the Heat's constant bickering with refs. Ironically, Rondo was given a technical foul for arguing a charging call later in the game. Arguing with referees should be much more severe than it currently is. Although Rondo was punished, many current players aren't penalized for hassling referees during games. When players become overheated and belligerent, refs should crack down and dole out technical fouls. It's infuriating as a fan to watch a player angrily plead their case in front of officials. Even if the referee made the wrong call, it's never ok to whine and cry like a baby every time a call doesn't go your way.
Another problem with NBA officiating, especially in the playoffs, is the dichotomy of "let them play" vs. calling all contact (little, some, or a lot) between players. The ideology behind "let them play" is that basketball is a game with grown men playing a physical sport, and not all contact should be considered foul play. Clearly you need both of these ways of thinking in order to have successful officiating. Contact of any type shouldn't always be considered a foul, but players also shouldn't be allowed to have free reign with their opponents and be as physical as they can be. NBA referees should strive to implement a combination of both ways of thinking, and right now, they may be too prone to call fouls when any sort of contact takes place.
Fans will always complain about officiating in sports. They want every call to be right all the time, but referees are human and can't be that held to pinpoint standards. As technology improves, and the league become more open to using replay as a way to determine calls, more referee decisions will be reviewed and corrected. However, more review causes games to slow down. We saw an example of this last year when the NFL decided to review every touchdown call every time, regardless of how obvious the call may be. This tedious analysis makes fans and players unhappy, so a proper balance between ensuring correctness and keeping the flow of the game moving is needed, but has yet to be found. Either way, it's clear the NBA needs to do a better job of training it's referees in in-game decision making. A championship should never be decided by poor officiating.
Officiating in basketball is more subjective than in any other sport. This leads to problems at all levels of the game, but most visibly in the NBA. In a sport like baseball, umpires have much more objective things to look for when making calls (except balls vs. strikes, which is pure subjection). In baseball, umpire decisions like safe vs. out or fair vs. foul are fairly black and white. Did the runner reach base before the first baseman caught the ball? If so, then the runner is safe. If not, then the runner is out. In basketball, almost all of the calls that an official has to make are very subjective. Did the defensive player get his feet set in time for the play to be called a charge? Did the defensive player make negligent contact to the offensive player on a shot? What really defines a shooting foul vs. a no call? These types of decisions are made on a situation by situation basis, with different refs making the call every time. Officials are given the discretion to make the calls as they see them. It's extremely hard for officials to get every call 100% correct because they all have different interpretations of the rules.
Flopping seems to be more and more of a growing problem in the NBA. Like in soccer, players are beginning to intentionally feign contact where wasn't any and fall to the ground dramatically to get the call from the ref. Flopping may result in more points for your team, but the act isn't performed in the essence of sportsmanship and fair competition. In basketball, hitting the floor when you're not driving to the basket isn't a common occurrence, so there's pressure on the refs to blame someone for hitting the floor. Not making calls during these situations results in scrutiny of referees because fans and spectators want to argue that their player was pushed to the ground intentionally by an opposing player. Monday night's Game 4 between the Boston Celtics and Miami Heat gave us some great examples. During two separate situations, two players from both teams fell to the ground at the same time, pressuring the refs to call a foul on one of them. In the first play, Kevin Garnett and LeBron James fell under the basket. The officials ruled that Garnett fouled James, even though they appeared to be tangled together and brought each other to the ground. The second instance happened later, when virtually the same thing happened between LeBron James and Mickael Pietrus, only this time, James was called for the foul. Both calls probably shouldn't have been made, as it appeared that both players fell in efforts to assert position under the basket, with no player actually instigating and pushing another player to the floor on purpose. This illustrates the point that officials are compelled to make a call because there was some form of contact and two players fell. During these types of situations, referees should be more aware and assess whether this was an instance of letting the players play and not calling anything.LeBron James and the Heat have also been scrutinized for their behavior in recent games. Like fans, players and coaches also get frustrated about the inconsistent and spotty accuracy of officiating. This has lead to visible displays of disbelief and disappointment by players during play of the game. Rajon Rondo pointed this out in a surprisingly honest halftime interview during Game 4 when he said the Celtics were exploiting the Heat's constant bickering with refs. Ironically, Rondo was given a technical foul for arguing a charging call later in the game. Arguing with referees should be much more severe than it currently is. Although Rondo was punished, many current players aren't penalized for hassling referees during games. When players become overheated and belligerent, refs should crack down and dole out technical fouls. It's infuriating as a fan to watch a player angrily plead their case in front of officials. Even if the referee made the wrong call, it's never ok to whine and cry like a baby every time a call doesn't go your way.
Another problem with NBA officiating, especially in the playoffs, is the dichotomy of "let them play" vs. calling all contact (little, some, or a lot) between players. The ideology behind "let them play" is that basketball is a game with grown men playing a physical sport, and not all contact should be considered foul play. Clearly you need both of these ways of thinking in order to have successful officiating. Contact of any type shouldn't always be considered a foul, but players also shouldn't be allowed to have free reign with their opponents and be as physical as they can be. NBA referees should strive to implement a combination of both ways of thinking, and right now, they may be too prone to call fouls when any sort of contact takes place.
Fans will always complain about officiating in sports. They want every call to be right all the time, but referees are human and can't be that held to pinpoint standards. As technology improves, and the league become more open to using replay as a way to determine calls, more referee decisions will be reviewed and corrected. However, more review causes games to slow down. We saw an example of this last year when the NFL decided to review every touchdown call every time, regardless of how obvious the call may be. This tedious analysis makes fans and players unhappy, so a proper balance between ensuring correctness and keeping the flow of the game moving is needed, but has yet to be found. Either way, it's clear the NBA needs to do a better job of training it's referees in in-game decision making. A championship should never be decided by poor officiating.
No comments:
Post a Comment