[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This is a supervisor issue. No one really cares that much either way.

I will say this, I do not say the rulebook term, I say what exactly happened. For example, if he was hit in the head, I say, "Hit in the head with the left arm." I will say, "Hit his right elbow before the shot." I hardly ever have to explain the type of foul or why I called a foul. Usually, a coach will argue that something else happens, but they know what I called. Learned this at a camp over 10 years ago and have been doing that ever since.

Peace

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I always verbalized the nature of the foul...and that is what we teach around here. As for this foul, at lot use "hit", I use "hands". As the OP post would imply "Illegal use of hands" is just too much of a mouthful.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I actually sometimes say more than "Illegal use of hands" in wording, but that is so generic and bland it does not tell any story about what actually happened. That is why I got away from rulebook terms for table presentation.

Peace

Since the three of us have officiated college ball I think that we can all agree that verbalization is okay at the college level, because HCs at the level are more professional. But I have always taught, that at the H.S. level, do not verbalize. Verbalizing only gives the aggrieved HC one more thing to complain about. That is my two cents.

MTD, Sr.