Bol
Two years ago

NBL Refs

There are a lot of complaints on these boards about the low standard of reffing in NBL games.

Not that I don't agree with these sentiments, but I would be interested to hear actual reasons why Hoopsters think the refereeing of of a low quality.

For example, too many fouls called? Too many soft calls? Inconsistent calls?

Topic #42192 | Report this topic


Isaac  
Two years ago

I think fans and players would put inconsistency top and I suspect it's a combination of refs being directed to adjust the calling of the game and it putting them outside how they'd naturally call it. I think that makes for more forced calls and then makeup calls or no-calls in response.

But without that direction, I think we had refs being pressured by players and coaches to let a lot go, and it made life tough for offensive players.

This is one from the half-bakery and thinking forward a few years, but I wonder if you could delegate some decisions based on contact to technology. e.g., players are wired, and any skin-to-skin contact in particular situations triggered an alert. Arm-bar in the back doesn't trigger (blocked by jersey), but hitting the arm or elbow while someone is shooting does. Combine that with streamlining penalties (minimising free throws and time taken to in-bound the ball) and perhaps that's basketball in 2030.

Reply #657396 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Vaughan Mayberry thinking he is the best in the NBL when he is actually in the lower echelon shows to the standard

Reply #657398 | Report this post


Freethrows  
Two years ago

Yuk, Isaac. I hate the idea of wearable technology on the basketball court.

Three refs are involved in every decision on every play of any given game. At least one player makes a mistake on every play. The refs get it wrong sometimes. They are human and just (some only human, and some only just!).

As a spectator, I firmly believe that Cairns is unjustifiably ripped off by awful ref mistakes every game. The rest of you are just whingers. Looking back on the great majority of calls, I can see why it was called, and concede the ref probably got it right.

The best thing the NBL could do to improve the quality of refereeing in the sport is to appoint a referee panel, headed by someone like Bill Mildenhall, who had a great reputation as a whistle blower. This panel should constantly review the way games have been called, and set a standard for how it should be done.

Games should be called consistently, and if there are to be changes in the types of things refs call, they have to be clearly defined, using video, and provided to the clubs no less than a week before they are put in place. In no way should coaches or teams be ambushed by a decision to make more calls on a certain type of play than have been consistently called in previous weeks.

LK is all about the money, and has done a brilliant job of raising the standard of play and game night experience for the NBL. I think he needs someone to set their sights on getting the nitty gritty right. There's a lot of "attention to detail" stuff that has been missing in this iteration of the NBL. It's time that changed.

Reply #657400 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

And what criteria or data are you using to back up such a claim #398?

Reply #657401 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

I think inconsistency is one of the main things. Sometimes they'll call something up one end or on certain players, but the other team won't get the call on an identical play 30sec later. Or sometimes the first half is reffed really well then for some reason it feels like a different game in the 2nd half with lots of bad calls.

The other is just the absolutely shocking calls and the amount that can happen. Refs are always going to make bad calls in sports, they're only human and mistakes happen, especially some decisions that are real 50/50 and could go either way. A few of those each game I can handle. The absolute shockers that are completely wrong seem to be an issue though. They should be very rare but its not uncommon to get multiple in a game.

Reply #657402 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Freethrows, everything you described regarding video, game reviews, panel to overview performance already occurs. Clubs receive extensive video examples prior to the season that outline league directions, points of emphasis and rule changes.

Reply #657405 | Report this post


Pop  
Two years ago

For the 'hoopsters' - the first ting is to stop thinking about the number of fouls called and whether they are 'soft' or 'hard'.

The number of fouls called will - or should - be determined by the way teams choose to play the game. A team that decides they have to 'chop it up' to negate an advantage the opposition has will [should] be prepared to pay for that with more fouls against them than the opposition they are aiming to negate.

In a physical' game there should be a lot of fouls called. In a game where both teams are prepared to try to play according to the rules, which are there to ensure a fair [not even] game, there should be many fewer fouls.

'Soft' and 'hard' fouls are also a flawed premise. An elbow tip on a shot is not a 'hard' foul, but it is a highly effective [and illegal] way of preventing a score.

The current 'biggie' overall is consistency, which I believe is compounded by the focus on subjective calls.

Calling instinctively, in line with the rules, allows as near as one can get to an instant, and most often right, decision. Having to work out whether or not to call something means the ref has to work through a process [even if it is sub-conscious] before s/he can make a decision. This more complicated process ensures more errors and delay in decision making, which with the speed of the game means many fouls are not called simply because it is too late by the time the official reaches his/her decision.

I believe the number of 'no calls', or perhaps more accurately non-calls, points to this issue. I vividly recall a recent Adelaide Lightning home game where there were multiple heavy clashes in block/charge situations with players crashing to the floor and no calls made: not because they were 'good no calls' [a terminology I have a problem with], but because the officials simply couldn't make a decision.

Refereeing is tough, particularly with coaches and players always looking to push the boundaries of what is legal, so it needs to be kept as simple and clean as possible, which means the officials seeing a lot of good basketball - so they instinctively recognise 'good' [and legal] as 'looking right' and that becomes the instinctive reference point for decisions - and being allowed [and encouraged/supported] to call the games instinctively according to the rules as they are written.

And that should result in a much higher level of consistency and more confidence in the officiating for players, spectators and even coaches.

Reply #657408 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

at #400, his no call on Carrera that turned into a review panel suspension then a fine after a nice letter from Cairns. If someone gets a fine then surely something should have been called on gameday?

Reply #657409 | Report this post


Brunson  
Two years ago

"Clubs receive extensive video examples prior to the season that outline league directions, points of emphasis and rule changes"

Unfortunately the referees don't always enforce it and hence what Wright's complaint was in the Melbourne game.

Reply #657414 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

#409 so based on one call you are saying he is lower echelon?

I think the average punter get confused with personal likes and dislikes when it comes to referees/umpires. I think that this determines in their eyes if that person is actually a good referee/umpire.

Mayberry has referee'd every grand final series in the last 10 years approx. He has been to the last 2 Olympic games. I hardly doubt if he was graded a lower echelon referee by FIBA or BA that he would have been appointed to such events.

Personally in the AFL I dislike Chris Donlon and Justin Schmidt, I just don't like the way they go about it. But this year they both umpired in the AFL finals series. Therefore the people charged with assessing their performance based on the AFL umpiring directives ranked them high enough to be appointed to finals. Doesn't change the fact I don't like them, but my personal like or dislike doesn't automatically make them lower echelon umpires.

People are too quick to say this referee is garbage or that referee is shit just because they don't like the way they hold themselves or the perception of arrogance etc.

Mayberry's resume clearly proves he is not lower echelon.

Reply #657415 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Safe to say #415 is Mayberry or a close friend

Reply #657416 | Report this post


Manu Fieldel  
Two years ago

I doubt people would think of refereeing as something that needed a lot of preparation, but it does. Refereeing games comes down to split second decision-making, however the approach to making those decisions is something that is worked on and analysed all year. Referres shouldn't be excused for making a wrong interpretation or judgement, because it's their job to work on that outside of game time.

Reply #657418 | Report this post


Manu Fieldel  
Two years ago

The dire problem in years past is that there were no full-time referees, so this sitting down and nutting out what should be called and how it should be called was, I imagine, non-existent.

I reckon there have been small steps since the full-time employment of a couple refs.

Reply #657420 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

#416 neither. Just someone pointing out the lunacy of such a statement. He has won the last 2 referee of the year awards. Clearly the people in charge of assessing his performance believe he is indeed in the upper echelon.

Reply #657422 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

http://nbl.com.au/news/article/38089-catching-head-referees

Reply #657424 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

"Refereeing is tough, particularly with coaches and players always looking to push the boundaries of what is legal, so it needs to be kept as simple and clean as possible, which means the officials seeing a lot of good basketball - so they instinctively recognise 'good' [and legal] as 'looking right' and that becomes the instinctive reference point for decisions - and being allowed [and encouraged/supported] to call the games instinctively according to the rules as they are written."

Exactly. The problem is I can't remember the last time an NBL game was simple and clean. We play it rough here in Australia.

Reply #657428 | Report this post


hoopie  
Two years ago

"We play it rough here in Australia"

Yep, and it will stay that way until refs call by the rules instead of by this week's interpretation. That includes tech and unsportsmanlike fouls.

I get that 'with so many big bodies moving so quickly in a confined space that some contact is inevitable'.
What shits me more is the players who deliberately seek out contact, either to intimidate or to get an advantage or because they are too lazy or unskilled to avoid it.

If the NBA can reduce the amount of thuggery over the last 10 - 20 years then why can't the NBL?

Reply #657436 | Report this post


anonymous  
Two years ago

Most of the NBL refs nowadays come from the BigV Level and we know how BigV refs are LOL

Reply #657444 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Considering there are 22 referee's in the NBL and only 6 reside in Melbourne (1 of those has relocated from WA - Reid never referee'd Big V) I'd suggest your statement is incorrect.

Reply #657448 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two years ago

Reply #657456 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

It is one of the hardest leagues in the world to ref. The league (incl the referees) are responsible for letting the game get too physical both on and off the ball for years and years. Now when they try and reel it back in, players struggle to adapt, there's lots of fouls, the game is stifled and the refs look like shit.

There's also a lot to be said about the effect of referees juggling full time employment with doing 1-2 games per week. Throw in the pre and post game responsibilities which go into the tens of hours and you combine that with the money on offer, it's not pretty. And it's not surprising referees are burnt out and lose interest.

There's no magic cure unfortunately. The league won't spend the $$ on many more full time referees and I'm not sure many of the refs would want to take it up anyway. It's a pretty big risk with not a whole lot of monetary reward.

Reply #657458 | Report this post


Manu Fieldel  
Two years ago

What kind of money do we think referees are on?

Reply #657460 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

A few hundo per game.

A few more hundo on top if reffing in Perth if you know what I mean. Tehehehe.

Reply #657461 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Depends on the panel. Apart from the 2 full timers, there are panels 1 to 3, each getting different amounts.

Reply #657462 | Report this post


da_answer  
Two years ago

Would love to know what they do take home per game out of curiosity.

Agree with #458, no magic cure - however couple of things I'd like to see:

- More free flowing games, this season seems to be a lot of stop / start
- Make sure ref's KNOW their craft (in the cylinder?), what target levels are set, if any?
- Refs ADMITTING they get it wrong from time to time, this could perhaps include an overruling in games by head referee, but moreso a weekly review that examines contentious calls and whether the call was right / wrong and needs to be addressed.

Reply #657468 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Approx. $350, $450, $650 before tax (depending on panel).

Reply #657472 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two years ago

Make sure ref's KNOW their craft (in the cylinder?)
This is the sort of shit that really bothers me. People talk about how difficult being a ref is, but that doesn't excuse getting the rule wrong. If you think you saw something that actually didn't happen, or didn't see something that did happen, that's understandable (unless it's whatever Reid thought he saw in that Vukona play). But if you talk about the cylinder, or apply a rule that says any dead ball foul is an automatic unsportsmanlike, or explain that if you jump in the air with the ball you're still allowed to dribble, that's just unacceptable.

The NBL just posted an article on the officiating today.

Reply #657476 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

Consistency is non existent.its funny the league says they want to encourage more movement yet this is the only league I have seen players get rewarded for taking a charge on a player running the lane... is that even basketball? There often seems to be two sets of rules where one team is called for minimal contact and the other can get away with significant contact. Often the interpretation and above changes in the next half. I find it really frustrating when they pull some off ball call, or minimal contact that doesn't effect the play where it really feels they are searching for the call to make a point and then they miss a blatant contact from behind or in the side of a player mid air attacking the basket.

Lastly more often than not in a one in one situation the player with the ball has the advantage, not here we call ridiculous charges, players have feet in the air for crying out loud, how dis they have position? Yes this includes many charges wildcats have taken.

The KISS principle is needed.

Reply #657481 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two years ago

Why should offensive players be able to barrel over defensive players just because they don't have the ball?

Reply #657482 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

I don't think it's a basketball play, and it goes against the notion of opening up movement in the game.

Reply #657483 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

I don't mean a player standing 10m in front, I mean very last second stepping in front unexpectedly to take a "charge"

Reply #657484 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

players have feet in the air for crying out loud, how dis they have position?

Where does it say a defender must have his feet on floor? Once a defender has established a legal guarding position he/she is allowed to move laterally or backwards to maintain this position.

Reply #657485 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

As long as a defender allows enough time and distance between him/herself and a player moving without the ball the defender is entitled to any spot on the floor that is not already occupied. As long as the moving player has time and distance to avoid contact it is a totally legal basketball play.

Reply #657486 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

And if they have a foot in the air it is more often than not a good indication that have not afforded the player with the ball time to avoid contact

Reply #657487 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two years ago

...what?

Reply #657489 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

I'm with you KR, WTF is that J?

Reply #657490 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

A player with the ball must expected to be guarded 100% of the time. Time and distance does not apply to the ball carrier. Establishing a legal guarding position and getting to the spot first does.

Reply #657492 | Report this post


Pointybits  
Two years ago

Every year minor changes as directed by the ref's supervisors create major changes.
Today’s NBL Refs have been told not to communicate with players during play phases such as warnings such as don’t hold, get your hands out etc. Historically "Ref Talk" kept the game flowing. Now there are endless fouls that many fans and commentators complain about.
In their endless wisdom the supervision wants to limit playing advantage/continuation giving the referees limited decision making.
In an earlier post the need for game officials involvement in pre game meetings plus
post game meetings and written reports. Time consuming yes, robots under the thumb, heading that way?

Reply #657493 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Goorjian effect unfortunately hinders NBL to this day.

Reply #657496 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Pointybits you speak of preventative refereeing "ref talk". It is still very much in vogue.

Reply #657497 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

A charge call is reliant on:

Timing
Distance
Defense right/wrong
Offense right/wrong

You still need to allow the offence a chance to avoid the contact ( time considering their distance from the defender) unless the defence is moving backwards, then they should obviously have an opportunity to avoid the contact.

Simply put you are not allowed to launch yourself in front if a player moving at full speed and draw a charge. They need to be afforded in effect an opportunity to avoid the contact.

Reply #657498 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

That is not the rule for the player with the ball

Reply #657499 | Report this post


FM  
Two years ago

Are you sure J isn't Shane Heal. He also shares the same deluded understanding.

The basics are established legal guarding position then who get there first with the defence moving laterally to rewards.

Reply #657500 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

My source is a current high-level official, who is yours? Maybe thaybdeluded understanding is the rule.

Reply #657503 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

You are getting the rule for guarding a player without the ball confused with guarding a player with the ball. Time and distance relates to without the ball, getting to the spot first and establishing a legal guarding position relates to with the ball.

Your current high level official is or has not advised you well.

Reply #657504 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

J it might be wise that you download the rules from FIBA.com and read articles 33.4 & 33.5

Reply #657508 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

Yep distance and time don't apply, it sure used too. It does however affirm my suggestion that if a player still has a foot in the air it increases the likelihood that they had not yet established legal guarding position as that requires two feet on the floor initially.

Not sure i like this interpretation but I can roll with it.

Reply #657516 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

You don't have to like it. It's the rule.

Reply #657517 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

That's why I said I can roll with it! Can you read?

Reply #657519 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

The key here is that some one like the "great" Michael Aylen has been dropped from the Olympic Squad. Everyone talks about him without knowing his name. Used to be a great ref, but with poor people skills and the dictatorial rants he effuses he's OUT.
The rest are way behind the times and can't relate to the NBL level that is now here.
Many of these "refs" ref SEABL. Poorly.
Like the AFL they are now the protected species. You simply can't criticise them.
Ray, Mel, Billie, Eddie etc. had people skills. The new brand of refs have been taught poorly by and the problem is continued.
Ref by the rules and don't back chat.

How about get back to the old school and talk to the players.
Aylen in charge of the refs. Fail. Dictatorial. Moved on. The current refs in the NBL and SEABL need to learn to communicate and relate to the players rather than rule by the book / rules. QED.
BTDT.

Reply #657527 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Yes of course I can read, but that isn't the point of the discussion. The rule is the rule. Whether you can roll with it or not makes no difference. The other point is you didn't know the rule and continued to argue. Next time you enter a discussion maybe have an understanding of the subject matter.

Reply #657534 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two years ago

Yep distance and time don't apply, it sure used too.
When? It hasn't applied at any time in my basketball life, which is long enough that if it ever did apply it's pretty well irrelevant now. It's not as though it's a recent change anyone has to get used to.

It does however affirm my suggestion that if a player still has a foot in the air it increases the likelihood that they had not yet established legal guarding position
No, it doesn't, because after establishing position you're allowed to move in order to maintain it, and moonwalking is an ineffective method of doing so.

Reply #657535 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

A comment to annon #527's grandiose rant:

FIBA have appointed 4 Australian referees to the 1st round of World Cup qualifying. Scott Beker, Michael Aylen, Vaughan Mayberry and Chris Reid.

Reply #657536 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Good point but after 3? Olympics in a row he didn't get the last one. Clearly there was a reason for that. MA will keep on keeping on no matter what or who gets in his way.

Reply #657538 | Report this post


koberulz  
Two years ago

FIBA have appointed 4 Australian referees to the 1st round of World Cup qualifying. Scott Beker, Michael Aylen, Vaughan Mayberry and Chris Reid.
Chris "it was in the cylinder" Reid?

Reply #657539 | Report this post


LV  
Two years ago

Its all about consistency.

If you call a foul on the visitors, call the same thing on the Wildcats.

Reply #657541 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Not many referees in the world get 1 Olympics, least of all 2 or 3 in a row. I think you will find it was time to blood someone else.

Reply #657542 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Kobe Reid also went to Eurobasket this year.

Reply #657543 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

Well done anon. Chastise someone who goes to the effort to re-check their understanding and then acknowledges that their interpretation was wrong. I would think the purpose of a discussion is to improve everyone involved's knowledge, that often occurs through conflict, at least initially.

"The rule is the rule. Whether you can roll with it or not makes no difference. "

"Next time you enter a discussion maybe have an understanding of the subject matter."

Please take you own advice and next time you respond please try comprehending what a statement means. "I can roll with it" obviously implies acceptance.

I have refereed, I have completed my level ones, I haven't kept it up to date (clearly) I will back myself in until proven other wise (appreciated) and continue to speak up because thats how we improve our knowledge and understanding as a collective. If you want to silence people unless they are so called "experts" like yourself then in my humble opinion you can Fuck Off.



Reply #657562 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

And you missed the point, your acceptance of the rule is of no relevance.

Reply #657566 | Report this post


J  
Two years ago

Has a go at someone for arguing the wrong interpretation of the rule, then has a go when someone accepts the correct interpretation...


Reply #657567 | Report this post


Brunson  
Two years ago

I feel the experienced referees have no accountability and therefore don't care.

Aylen is the perfect example. Last finals series he made 3 absolute howlers (Jacobsen getting tackled with a no unsportsmanlike foul being called, Matt Knight pushing the ball at Trice's head no unsportsmanlike foul, Drmic being called for a flop instead of recieving 3 free throws). All 3 could have changed the result if he called them correctly. If it was any other professional league that referee would not have done the Grand Final. However in the NBL it doesn't matter how the experienced referee has performed throughout the year or in the previous final they will still get the grand final.

A recent example of Aylen not giving a shit is in the Cairns vs Wildcats game where a fight broke out. The video link below shows the start of the fight at 18 seconds in and it is not until 17 seconds later Aylen decides to make some effort to control the situation. Fast forward to 2:22 to see a better view of him doing absolutely nothing. That is apparently a referee with what 20 years experience in the NBL as well as Olympic experience. If he decides he doesn't care that is his choice however he could show he cares for his referee collegues. The female referee did her best to stop the situation but due to her size could have faced a dangerous possibility to her health however Aylen just walks over whenever it suited him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zo6RTkzcUpA

The sooner referees like him are out of the league, the sooner it can finally start to move forward. Until then it will just stay the same.

Reply #657610 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Unfortunately the up and comers are of the same ilk. Taught bad habits by those above them. Aylen is simply terse. People skills limited and a monotone dictatorial voice. It simply says I am right.
Of course if you try and make your point you will be immediately shut down, of course they all have long memories and they will win.

Reply #657612 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Brunson you might want to learn the principles of referee rules. 2 referees in and at least 1 out. When you work out who was the furthest referee away from the contest you will understand. Referee rules nominate the furthest referee stay away from the melee to observe if any players come off the bench. Haters going to hate.

Reply #657616 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

from Boti blog:


STRONG rumours afoot that two of the NBL's more senior referees have decided to blow the whistle own their own careers after not enjoying their recent performance reviews. (Good thing it wasn't coaches, players or fans doing the reviews then!)
A "whistleblower" told me (you see what I did there?) the duo pulled the pea, effective immediately, within 48 hours of each other.

Reply #657720 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Aylen and Mayberry? Reid?

First bit of negative feedback they receive and they bolt... what a joke.

Reply #657729 | Report this post


Anonymous  
Two years ago

Two current (or former I guess now) FIBA Sydney based referees is the word on the street ...

Reply #657904 | Report this post


Callisto 89  
Two years ago

I wish the NBL would talk more about the software they are using to log ref performance, I have heard on the grapevine each ref receives a cut of their game with incorrect, correct, and missed call info. All used to generate performance discussions weekly (word is too many below standard gets you panel demoted, e.g. earning less $$$s, hence some dummy spits/walkies from those who considered them above reproach). From all accounts, refs boss Butler was an obsessive about self review, so good to see him using that to improve the quality of the current output.

Reply #658648 | Report this post




 

Reply to this topic

Random name suggestion for anonymous posters: Rhea 71

Rules:You must read the Terms of Use. No spam, no offensive material, no sniping at other clubs, no 'who cares?'-type comments, no naming or bashing under 18 players. Learn how to embed YouTube videos or tweets

Please proof-read your post before submitting as you will not be able to edit it afterwards.



Close ads
PickStar - The best place to book sports stars
Westside Basketball Association
Dunk.com.au - Custom basketball uniforms

Advertise on Hoops to a very focused, local and sports-keen audience. Email for rates and options.

Recent Posts



Invoicing clients? Stay productive with Punch, the insightful time tracker that earns you more.

Special offer: $30/month Pay $100 for lifetime access. Sign up now!

.


An Australian basketball forum covering NBL, WNBL, ABL, Juniors plus NBA, WNBA, NZ, Europe, etc | Forum time is: 6:30 pm, Thu 22 Aug 2019 | Posts: 776,725 | Last 7 days: 908