Quote:
Originally Posted by tomegun
Doing something just because it has always been done that way is something I never want to do. Where would we be if everyone thought that way?
|
We've never had any problems with one hand, vocalize each digit, signals here in our little corner of Connecticut. It's taught that way because it works for us. If it wasn't working, if someone were to suggest a better way, our training committee would take a look at it, and decide to change, or not to change.
We have made lots of mechanics changes over the past thirty years. Some have worked, other haven't. A few years ago we experimented with no long switches on fouls in the backcourt where there is no change of possession. I guess that the "rule" was too difficult for some of our officials to comprehend. Some would follow it with no problems, others would have problems, like not switching on a player control foul (not in the backcourt, possession changes), and having problems on rebounding fouls (possession, or no possession). This led to some awkward moments where one official started to make a switch and the other stayed. So after two years, we went back to switching on all fouls.
We've also added a few of our own "Connecticut only" signals over the years. We've added a supplemental “Intentional Foul: Excessive Contact” (Hard Foul) signal in our high school games. And we've added a “Shooter Has Foot Touching Three Point Line” signal. Connecticut is an IAABO state, and these are not accepted IAABO signals.
Right now we're experimenting with different boundary responsibilities in a two person game.
We're not stuck in time. In our little corner of Connecticut, evolution supersedes revolution.