Faking...

Referee Issues moderated by WPP's Righteous Referee

Moderator: Righteous Referee

oldtimer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 4:57 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: All of the above

Re: Faking...

Postby oldtimer » Mon Nov 07, 2016 1:19 pm

Several years ago, soon after USAWP issued a similar interpretation,I watched an age group player quite literally back into a defender that was not even pressing him, then dip his head and spin the ball. The referee called a contra. Though the player was on my team, I laughed out loud. We had been practicing how, if pressed hard, to make the attempt to move the ball, let go to get the whistle, then immediately pass to the driver that was supposed to trigger off the whistle. This player clearly decided that getting the foul was easier than actually just legging up to make a pass.

When he got to the bench I asked him what the whistle was supposed to indicate. He said 'a foul', of course. So I asked him how backing in to the defender could possibly be a foul on the defender. He stopped doing it.

Years later, I am watching high school and college players constantly simulate being fouled in order to get the direct shot or just to get the free pass. I keep wishing the referees would call the contra, but they don't. Instead they hold the whistle, the player works for the foul 4, 5, or more times - or worse, after multiple attempts the referee finally bl#$% the whistle, and the direct shot is taken... often at the end of the shot clock, giving validation to the player, making the game more boring, and rewarding 'cheating' over skill.

Have I ever said how much I dislike the direct shot rule?

sidelineview
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:26 pm

Re: Faking...

Postby sidelineview » Mon Nov 07, 2016 3:11 pm

Two things:

- I will clarify my comments.
- Smart-behind comments/editorial do nothing towards fostering civil and academic discussions. Haven't you learned anything from this year's election?

Mr. Roll is correct in reproducing the text from the NCAA rule book. And as written, I understand the conclusion he has made.

However - at the NCAA referee school held at Santa Clara University, Dr. Corb made it very clear that we were not to declare Simulation fouls as if the games were governed by FINA rules - which is essentially what the POE excerpt instructs. Dr. Corb told the audience that a foul should be called if the Simulation caused a foul against the opponent and to perhaps show a card to indicate the reason for the foul. An example, a player in possession of the ball fakes a grabbing foul and ends up kicking the opponent in the chops.

I don't know what instructions were given at the other ref school sites --- there was an issue of some instructors giving their own interpretations instead of following the "company line". But Dr. Corb made it clear that we were not to call Simulation ala FINA.

If you want to disagree, please do so. Just do it without being a jerk.

User avatar
polofantastic
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2006 9:42 am

Re: Faking...

Postby polofantastic » Mon Nov 07, 2016 3:13 pm

Valid points you make. Tough calling a contra-foul here though, at the ball, as it usually results in a 2-1 counter attack the other way...did the punishment fit the crime? I like the no call for that situation. Away from the ball maybe much easier for a contra-foul (IMO). If your not rewarding them with an ordinary for trying to work a foul, they should learn. My big peave is seeing it called (or not called) early in the game and then late in the game all of a sudden they start calling ordinary's left and right? Keep it consistent! Specifically on the perimeter with those 5M shots!

oldtimer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 4:57 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: All of the above

Re: Faking...

Postby oldtimer » Mon Nov 07, 2016 3:48 pm

I'm somewhat of a 'no pain, no gain' kind of guy. If there is no actual punishment (a no call is not punishment), the behavior continues. The reason I say that is if you pay attention, most people only remember pleasure and pain rather than mild disappointment - otherwise, nobody would ever have bad habits!

If you want the behavior stopped, you make it painful. If you want the behavior encouraged, you make it pleasurable. Goals from direct shots are pleasurable, while no-calls are only a mild disappointment. Therefore, no-call will never override the occasional pleasure of scoring a goal.

ephpolo
Posts: 888
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 12:31 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Ex-player, Ex-coach, referee

Re: Faking...

Postby ephpolo » Mon Nov 07, 2016 4:15 pm

oldtimer wrote:Have I ever said how much I dislike the direct shot rule?


+1

Invitation to "draw the foul" to "create" offense.

oldtimer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 4:57 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: All of the above

Re: Faking...

Postby oldtimer » Mon Nov 07, 2016 5:23 pm

I'm just going to follow this up with an anecdote about a collegiate game I saw earlier this season, while seated near some former players of one of the teams. At one point, an ordinary was called on a perimeter player who was center cage about 6M out. He reared up as if to shoot, then passed to an open player at the 1 spot - who basically screwed it up by pump faking 3-4 times before shooting.

When this happened, one of the former players starts yelling about how the fouled player should have taken the shot. Someone else pointed out that it was actually a great play, as the goalie had been locked and the player at the wing was wide open. This former player started ranting about how the direct shot is the best shot in the game, with an 80%+ scoring percentage so nobody should *ever* pass that opportunity up.

This is what we have wrought with the direct shot.

Rbpolo0414
Posts: 3636
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 9:43 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Fan

Re: Faking...

Postby Rbpolo0414 » Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:03 pm

oldtimer wrote:I'm just going to follow this up with an anecdote about a collegiate game I saw earlier this season, while seated near some former players of one of the teams. At one point, an ordinary was called on a perimeter player who was center cage about 6M out. He reared up as if to shoot, then passed to an open player at the 1 spot - who basically screwed it up by pump faking 3-4 times before shooting.

When this happened, one of the former players starts yelling about how the fouled player should have taken the shot. Someone else pointed out that it was actually a great play, as the goalie had been locked and the player at the wing was wide open. This former player started ranting about how the direct shot is the best shot in the game, with an 80%+ scoring percentage so nobody should *ever* pass that opportunity up.

This is what we have wrought with the direct shot.


80% is laughable. 20% is more likely and that is probably high.

oldtimer
Posts: 2283
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 4:57 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: All of the above

Re: Faking...

Postby oldtimer » Mon Nov 07, 2016 9:30 pm

I spent the past 3 years taking video and tracking very detailed stats for a local HS team (partly as a volunteer to help out, and partly as a personal project). The stats were recorded for both teams in excruciating detail from the videos. While not D1 or collegiate level play, your numbers are pretty consistent with what I found (25% to 30% over the course of the season).

It also is interesting that those who felt compelled to always take the shot had a significantly lower scoring percentage than those who were more discerning (not surprisingly), yet believed their percentage was much higher than it was. These were also the players that would spend more time working for the foul rather than making the better play - resulting in more turnovers as well. Go figure...

Rbpolo0414
Posts: 3636
Joined: Thu Nov 12, 2015 9:43 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Fan

Re: Faking...

Postby Rbpolo0414 » Mon Nov 07, 2016 10:06 pm

oldtimer wrote:I spent the past 3 years taking video and tracking very detailed stats for a local HS team (partly as a volunteer to help out, and partly as a personal project). The stats were recorded for both teams in excruciating detail from the videos. While not D1 or collegiate level play, your numbers are pretty consistent with what I found (25% to 30% over the course of the season).

It also is interesting that those who felt compelled to always take the shot had a significantly lower scoring percentage than those who were more discerning (not surprisingly), yet believed their percentage was much higher than it was. These were also the players that would spend more time working for the foul rather than making the better play - resulting in more turnovers as well. Go figure...


25-30 sounds about right for high school, where the shotblocking and goaltending is not consistently good. I suspect D1 college is in the 15-20 % range. I bet coach Graham has the numbers.

Doru Roll
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 6:56 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: player, fan, referee

Re: Faking...

Postby Doru Roll » Tue Nov 08, 2016 12:10 am

sidelineview wrote:Two things:

- I will clarify my comments.
- Smart-behind comments/editorial do nothing towards fostering civil and academic discussions. Haven't you learned anything from this year's election?

Mr. Roll is correct in reproducing the text from the NCAA rule book. And as written, I understand the conclusion he has made.

However - at the NCAA referee school held at Santa Clara University, Dr. Corb made it very clear that we were not to declare Simulation fouls as if the games were governed by FINA rules - which is essentially what the POE excerpt instructs. Dr. Corb told the audience that a foul should be called if the Simulation caused a foul against the opponent and to perhaps show a card to indicate the reason for the foul. An example, a player in possession of the ball fakes a grabbing foul and ends up kicking the opponent in the chops.

I don't know what instructions were given at the other ref school sites --- there was an issue of some instructors giving their own interpretations instead of following the "company line". But Dr. Corb made it clear that we were not to call Simulation ala FINA.

If you want to disagree, please do so. Just do it without being a jerk.

You have eminently described yourself in your first and last sentences. As for myself, I learned a lot from this year's election. Mostly that uninformed people always try to pass their uninformed drivel for the truth. And when someone calls BS on them, they resort to name calling, subterfuge and appeal to higher authority ("so-and-so said"). Both Drumpf and Hillarity have shown a decidedly obscene proclivity to do so.

You stated in a rather unequivocal tone that: "If Hooper received a yellow card in an NCAA game, the card was for a low level disrespect or misconduct, not for Simulation. There is no Simulation foul or warning in the NCAA rule book." I simply showed, in no uncertain terms, that you were wrong. Instead of heeding my friendly advice that you try and learn about the game, you came back with name calling, subterfuge and appeal to higher authority in the form of a rather implausible argument attributed - in the third person - to Dr. Corb. I think that both Drumpf and Hillarity would be very proud of you.

Sincerely.
Mr. Roll

(that's my real name. sidelineview is a subterfuge)

PMG
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2016 6:08 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Parent

Re: Faking...

Postby PMG » Tue Jun 20, 2017 1:42 pm

oldtimer wrote:I'm just going to follow this up with an anecdote about a collegiate game I saw earlier this season, while seated near some former players of one of the teams. At one point, an ordinary was called on a perimeter player who was center cage about 6M out. He reared up as if to shoot, then passed to an open player at the 1 spot - who basically screwed it up by pump faking 3-4 times before shooting.


Saw a perfect example of this at a recent girls HS tournament (albeit with a better result) - player was fouled just outside 5M on the 2 post, waited a split second to pick up the ball and while all eyes were focused on her (including defender and goalie) she tossed a nice little pass to a wide open driver who had a simple redirect into a wide open cage. She could have easily taken a shot, but realized that the better play was the pass. The driver was rewarded for her efforts with an easy goal - teamwork FTW.

Return to “The Quicker Kicker Outer”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests