Quote:
Originally Posted by grunewar
I just don't feel I do the kids justice - and that's important for me.
|
+1
I felt this way about the GAME, players, partners then myself after 80% of my big school 2 person games last season.
Heck, I even
had to make a few educated guesses in some instances.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy
I'd rather do two-man with a good partner who exercises proper primary coverage than three-man with one or two guys whose primary consists of being able to count the number of seams on the ball at any given time.
|
I dont know Freddy, give me 1 good partner, 1 inexperienced official & we can make it happen!! The night(s) you get "a crew of three" that is on their A game should be cherished. I like to replay those on the drive home from other games, some nights...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Translation: Most of the veteran officials either do not wish to make the physical effort which is required to properly work the 2-man system or aren't capable of doing so, and thus elected to remove themselves from consideration for those assignments.
|
You forgot to add your --->>
Like JRut says, a good motion offense... please! (unless you're working with a good partner)
As APG points out, its a little bit of each for me, well, except for the well versed in 3s part-- 2s is my foundation (I just have a larger primary, I'll pinch but wont rotate & instead of putting whistles on
must haves from Cs side, I'm now putting them on plays from the Ts side).
Plus, working back to back nights of 2s followed by a night of 3s isnt the best practice. Especially when the 3rd night is at different levels of play, but hey, it CAN be done. But should it have to be?
The Cons definitely outweigh the Pros here.