[Kelvin green]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

It may be easy, but as I've said 100 times, it's not efficient. The women's (and NBA's) coverages routinely require two sets of eyes to shift their fields of vision in common situations where the men's coverages require only one shift (or none).

Here's what I mean. Common play. A1 with the ball outside the 3-point arc and below the FT line extended. A1 passes the ball to A2, who is on the block closer to A1. When A1's defender collapses on A2, A2 passes back out to A1 for the open 3-pointer.

With the women's mechanics, this entire play is in the Lead's primary. At the beginning, you have the Lead watching the arc and the T watching the post. After A1's initial pass, the L shifts to the post and T shifts to the arc. After A2 passes back to A1, L shifts again to the arc and the T shifts back to the post.

In the men's coverage, neither T nor L has to shift the field of vision at all in this play and the Lead is already ready to officiate the ensuing rebounding action.

There are several examples like this one. (For example, take the above play, except A2 has the ball first, passes out and gets it back.) But I won't belabor it. Men's coverages are, IMHO, not only better, but much better than the Women's/NBA coverages.

It may sound bad, but it happens very often in the Men's game as well. Ball goes OOB on the endline opposite the L. It's the Lead's whistle even tho s/he may not even have been looking at the play.

Chuck

I am going to disagree that men's is better. While it does take some coordination, what it does do is out the closest official to the ball make the call. The off ball calls are made by an official farther away but the most critical calls at the ball are made by the closest. The off ball calls are actually better since the official who is watching has a broader and better field of vision.

I have done both ways and prefer NBA. If your in a zone then maybe the men's works better in one-on one ball and matchups like the NBA it is clearly better