Rolling under the play.
 

Apparently OHSAA wants us to roll under(toward endline) a ball handler/defender as T instead of going over(towards division line).

Our local association doesn't seem to be to fond of it, what say you?

Have not heard or read anything to that effect. Who is your source or what site did you get this from?

John Tipton's presentation to our local association.

Also was warning anyone that wanted to do playoffs that they better be parallel to the endline as L

I'm having trouble understanding what this means.

As in shoulders parallel to the end line? That would look weird when rotating, no?


Isn't Ohio known for having stupid mechanics in football and basketball?

If your trail and to avoid trying to look through the back of the ball handler, you need roll to the top of the match up or under to give you the angle. We are being told to go under, which puts everyone but that match up out of your vision.


Don't know about football but OHSAA mechanics are known for, "you will do NFHS mechanics by the book or you will not do well in playoff assignments"

And puts you out of position to get to the other end in the event of a turnover. Trail should trail the play.

I haven't heard anything like that kind of blanket edict here in the central district. Maybe it was 'if you have a choice, better under than over' or something, but it's so situation-dependent there can't be one simplistic rule of thumb. In 2 clinics and a few meetings so far, there's hasn't been any such advice. I have heard "don't go above and so far into the court that you risk getting caught up in fast break traffic", but nothing like go under at all times. And the parallel for L is about when standing, not keeping them parallel while rotating.

And no, I don't think they are 'stupid' mechanics at all. Basketball is just straight NFHS book mechanics (with the exception of no long switches in the backcourt). And of course you have to follow them to get playoff assignments - imagine that, following instructions and doing things the right way - as defined by those making the assignments - in order to get assignments.

As to football, ok, I get some don't like the specificity of the football mechanic manual, but I like having a set of common, standard operating procedures that I know everyone has been trained on and evaluated on. I like having the basics covered and a single set of procedures and protocols so I don't have to worry about those when filling in or working with a new person, no matter if they're from this district or not. Just like when I was in the Army and we always carried ammo in the same place, filled our rucks the same way, stowed tools and other items on each vehicle the same way, it's not about being robotic or rigid, it's about having a base of uniformity so that everyone is starting from the same base and on a common page. Of course it's not the only way or even the 'best' way - whatever that is. But it works quite well and most certainly isn't *stupid*.

I attended the annual rules interpreters meeting in Columbus and never heard these directives nor have I received any bulletins or updates saying such. Our director has been a proponent of "squaring" the shoulders for some time but I've never read a statement that says assignments depend on it. Yes it could be one of several factors that might determine an official is not rated high enough to receive regional/state tournament assignments.

Rolling under the play.
 

"Rolling under" is just another term for "opening low." I always do this. You get a great angle between the players on a potential drive, and all you have to do is follow it in while the L is covering the secondary defenders.

I respectfully disagree with Camron about moving up toward the division line. How many times does something of consequence happen up there as compared to the semi circle and below? Why would I want to take myself in the opposite direction from where the basketball is going? Why would I want to observe plays from farther away? And as for getting beat going the other way....an acceptable risk considering there are ways (the button hook, for example) to get good temporary angles while you're transitioning to new lead. And not every transition is a fast break; getting beat is an unfounded fear 85% of the time.

In summary, I love the OHSAA effort to move toward "rolling under." Watched the Marquette/AZ St. game this evening and saw all of the officials doing it. I think JD is advocating it. Three officials in your TV picture will be more common this year and that's why.

On another note, I have NOT seen consensus yet on how to stand as the lead (parallel, modified, or 45). Three camps, three different emphases. Guess ya just gotta do it the way your assigner wants. Wish we could get a more universal opinion on this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you pay attention to NBA officials they also try to do this whenever possible.

The only college supervisor I have who really teaches positioning wants us stepping down whenever possible, in the C and the T. I hug the sideline and get below matchups in the Trail.

Heard from an NBA guy the other night that they have done studies on the number of correct whistles/no calls from Trail either 1) being closer to the division line and stepping onto the court to see the matchup or 2) hugging the sideline and getting below the matchup. He said their call percentage was significantly better from hugging the sideline and getting below the matchup. Take that for what it's worth.

NBA officials have the best positioning, so I like to do what they do. They are always at an angle.

If this had a "Like" button I would click on it.

If that is the rationale , I would be fine with it. But it wasn't expressed that way. Tipton didn't like goings under so he might not been inclined to mention that.

The other thing that was brought up was the L bounce the ball to the throw in on anything on the sideline bow the FTE and the T keeping the count.

This mechanic makes things easier for sure but doesn't really lead to more correct calls. If the Trail can't bounce the ball to the thrower in the corner and get his butt to the 28' line to referee the play then he probably shouldn't be doing varsity ball. I wouldn't concern yourself with this one as much as other positioning things.

You keep bringing up "John Tipton", is that somebody we should all know??

No one should be calling college basketball then, b/c that's the mechanic.

Why should the Trail have to go down there to administer the throw-in when the Lead is 3 feet away? :confused: So, yes, maybe it's just to make things simpler. Has nothing to do with whether or not a person should have to hustle back to the 28' line.

I don't know what his footprint is, I was asked who my source was and thats the guy. He was putting everything in the context of the playoff assignments .

So it seems like Ohio is not 100% NFHS mechanics.

I wasn't addressing college mechanics, pretty sure the 'OHSAA' in the OP is a high school association. I'm well aware of the college and NBA mechanics and their "makes things easier" benefit, my point was that mechanic does not lead to more correct calls and thus is not as important as other mechanics tweaks. :)

Gotcha. We too have administrators here that are overly concerned with stupid mechanics stuff instead of "getting the play right". It's pretty sad. :(

I have never heard that....quite the contrary, every clinic I've been to (including Jim Berry's) says the L only handles throw-ins on the end line, that the T would handle the situation in the above case. Are you sure you heard it right? Maybe that's just John's opinion but it's not OHSAA's.

Please Forgive the Length...
 

NFHS mechanics:
Lead bouncing the ball across the corner to administer a throw-in is...
...allowed for two-person ("The throw-in is administered by the official responsible for the boundary line.")...
...but not for three-person ("In the frontcourt, the throw-in is administered by the official responsible for the boundary line.")
Simple enough.
But let's not, for the sake of a mechanic either cherished or detested, overlook one significant thing: It's a legitimate PCA issue more than anything. I.e., after distributing the ball to the thrower, what kind of surveillance is the administering official providing?
New officials, particularly, are -- I think due to an engrained habit picked up by the legitimate two-person mechanic -- inclined to focus on the player defending the thrower and the thrower him/herself to the detriment of low post play. Lead's focus on the torsos and the elbows of players in his primary away from the throw-in goes lacking. This is the problem seen also with many Lead officials doing three-person who bounce the ball across the corner. Rather than pass the surveillance of the thrower and defender there off to the Trail and turning attention inward, his/her need for avid attention on the jostling going on in his/her primary down low is ignored.
This is observed time and time and time again with new officials. Enough that it's just a lot easier maintaining the correct three-person mechanic stated above and teach the Lead to look inside during the throw-in, unencumbered by the perceived need or lingering habit to look at the throw-in outside his/her primary.
Good officials at Trail can easily perform this prescribed mechanic and they are observed doing so regularly without incident. There's really no good reason, other than personal preference and perhaps expediency, to vary from the mechanic, if that's what you're asked to follow.
Is this a legitimate point?

I heard right. Whether he was couching his opinion it as OHSAA 's stance or not, it's hard to say. If he's wrong, there probably will be a lynch mob if some guys get ripped for those mechanics.

Was the OHSAA's reasoning for changing the mechanic "to get more correct calls"?

Don't know, you'll have to ask this "John Tipton" guy. :D

I'd love to be able to do this in my state too but alas. I think it certainly makes things easier for the Trail, especially when the throw-in is very close to the endline. Let's be honest, does it really matter who bounces the ball to the thrower? :confused:

Only to you apparently [emoji6]

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

I would agree in some circumstances. I think it is about where and how the play starts and where it moves. If you're already on the low side and the play is moving that direction, it may not make sense to try to get to the high side since it will briefly put you in a stacked alignment. But, at some point, you're going to have to be on the high side unless you're going to continue down to the endline.

Agree....to a point. We're not talking about farther way, just from the opposite side at a similar distance.

I just don't like taking the other 8 players out of my field of vision for no good reason. When you go low and look back up through the play, you lose all coverage of the corner and any activity originating form there (approaching screens, e.g.) and there is no one else that will be covering that.

Honestly, that topic is just silliness...and that is why you keep seeing varied opinions. It matters not one bit. It is a moving target that will change 1 day after you switch your stance. The same guy that is telling you to go parallel (or otherwise) will, after everyone is going parallel, will shift to 45 so he can tell you something to change again.