Ball-handlers / Freedom of Movement
 

So, how are things going with the rules around freedom of movement for ball handlers?

We had a boys varsity team yesterday who routinely commits 30+ fouls a game. And yesterday might have been the worst we've seen - they ended up with 39 fouls (the other team had 23). 68 free throws in the game. 4 of their players fouled out.

It's almost like they hope the officials will back down after a while rather than adjust their style of play. Maybe some do.

Gotta say, it wasn't the most fun I've ever had officiating.

I've worked two boys games so far and in those games they cheated until we called them and we called them early. Then if they cheated again it was because they were tired.

Hopefully the players continue to adjust.

OK for the most part. We try to get it early, and most of the time the players will adjust.

Had one the other night that got a little strange. We called a couple early and they settled down just fine. Then with about 3:45 left in the 4th it went to rat poop...all of a sudden they were hand checking right left and sideways - three starters from one team wound up fouling out. The only thing we could figure is that it's early in the season, they were getting tired and quit moving their feet.

How did they cheat?

As for freedom of movement in my HS games, the coaches haven't been complaining when we call it on their teams. Apparently the VHSL has gotten the message across to them about what to expect, now it's just a matter of the players catching on.

I've noticed the same. VHSL = no surprises. But some of the non-VHSL games I do (VISAA, HRAC, etc.) = not so much. So like Rich was saying, we're calling the fouls in those games and some (not all) of the coaches are shocked. Had one chirping about a 9-4 foul count the other night, but the thing is we talked about the renewed emphasis on FOM via Rule 10-6 at the pre-game coaches conference! And his team didn't get it. So I politely reminded him about it, later I had to warn him, and as he was walking to the locker room at halftime....well let's just say we started the 3rd quarter with free throws. He still won by 21. Not on my Christmas card list.

On a more general note, two-hands is an easy black-and-white call (seen lots of those, usually when a defender starts to get beat and panics), and I've seen a few extended arm bars. But I haven't noticed to much hand-checking (hot stove or maintained hand). Seems like the players are only getting half of the message.

This is actually the same as it has been the last couple of years. Coaches know the rule basically and if we call it they either adjust or they sit. Really not much else to complain about. We still have a coach that wants every little touch a foul, but for the most part we ignore that and call what we think is a foul.

I have had games with a lot of fouls to games with hardly going into the bonus in the first half.

I also have been doing this for a longer time in college basketball, so I never had to be convinced as to what I should do as an official. I am pretty dug in at this point.

Peace

Will It Carry Over To The Regular Season ???
 

I called several hand checks in a scrimmage yesterday. No coach complained to me, and most yelled at their player, "Keep your hands off the ball handler".

If we stay consistent and persistent.

And you guys are still doing scrimmages into December?

So far, I'm seeing kids adapting. I'm having to call fewer second-half fouls than first-half ones.

Of course, in one game, I had Coach V complain we should've called more hand-checking fouls, while Coach H complained the fouls were 8-0 against his team.

Maybe I've just been lucky, but after 6 varsity games I have seen some major improvements. Only issue I've had, which was a sad one, was a star player in a great game picking up three stupid fouls(Hand checks).

Stuff going in the right direction:

1) Players adapt way faster to calls. After the first couple calls the games are clean.

2) Coaches stopped complaining about it except jokes, "I can't wait until January when this stops getting called." Less anger and more joking around is always good

3) Fans only yell, "Let them play!!" in the first quarter instead of riding us the entire game.

4) Officials seem to all be on the same page this year. Makes the games flow when we're all consistent.

Better Late Than Never ...
 

State mandates: First game for girls can be no sooner than December 7, first game for boys no sooner than December 12.

We're still playing football. State semifinals are early this week.

State semi-finals in football this weekend but public school basketball started on Nov. 30th, private schools started a 2 weeks before that.

Girls basketball started November 16 for regular season games. Boys basketball started the week after on November 23.

Football State Finals for all classes are the weekend of Thanksgiving on Friday and Saturday. So the weekend before Thanksgiving was Semifinal weekend and the Boys were already practicing.

It can be done, both sports playing at the same time. ;)

Peace

Just finished working a varsity girls tournament and did a boys tourney before Thanksgiving.Seems like the kids and coaches here are getting the message and after a few called in the beginning they clean it up.Extended Armbar hasn't been all that much of an issue here it's primarily two hands on the ball handlers or handchecking.

I had a three-team scrimmage this past Friday and one team came out particularly aggressive on defense. I had to call 2-3 hand checks or arm bars early-on; at one point, I said "hands off the ball handler" after calling one. To their credit, the players adapted to to the calls.

Here, the girls season started this past week. Boys start tomorrow. My first HS level game is Tuesday. Let the fun begin. :D

My Two Cents!
 

The "rules changes" that have been implemented the last two years really have not changed anything but to encourage officials to turn back the clock at least forty (if not more) years with respect to how the game should be officiated.

For me, I haven't changed how I called fouls for the last forty-five years. It is the responsibility of the officials to call the game per the rules and the players should play the game per the rules.

MTD, Sr.

Why are people acting like this is new this year? This was a rule and emphasis last year.

It has actually been the "rule" for as long as I can remember. It was just that way too many officials (nearly all, me included) were doing a piss poor job of calling it. No one was going to do it and be the only one doing it. They tried points of emphasis for years and got no movement in what was being called. They really didn't want to go to absolutes but pretty much everyone was ignoring the directives year after year. So, they simply changed the wording to make what should been a foul all along more set in stone without latitude to ignore it under what was really a poorly applied advantage/disadvantage philosoply. There was an advantage, just one that was less blatant than some fouls.

That's what I said two posts ago.

MTD, Sr.

Pepperidge Farm Remembers ...
 

There's a big difference. Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. can remember, or, rather, should remember, a lot further back in time than most on the Forum. Most Forum members do not remember climbing up a ladder to get the laced ball out of the peach basket.

I agree. We had a big discussion about this in our association last year. Several guys and coaches for that matter didn't like the new wording and the automatics. My answer was exactly what you just said. It was really our fault as officials because we weren't officiating this type of contact properly.

We're starting our second week of games in NVA and just ended a few Kick-Off Tournaments.

IMO I think the players have adjusted pretty well and it's good to see them playing D at a distance. When we do call the foul for "hands," many times the coach just reiterates the point, "You can't do that" or "Stop with the hands." The sub-V teams and lessor talented and slower players have more problems, as they get beat more often and will stick out their hands to slow the defender down - one of the purposes of the emphasis.

I do believe I've called more fouls "on the block" though, but that's probably me adjusting and calling what I should have called all along.

I don't think we were piss poor as you say, we were trained(by very high level officials in some cases) to use advantage/disadvantage and then modified further to RSBQ on these calls. I think the game is back to the correct way, but every camp I attended the last 10 years (prior to last season) still wanted you to only enforce RSBQ. Then, the NCAA changed their stance and we were told to call automatics in collegiate conferences and the NFHS subsequently followed. I like the game better now, but there is still some RSBQ to determine whether or not we have a true "hot stove" touch. The NCAA D1 coaches put out a video stating they want these philosophical changes (rules have been there) and acknowledged they need to adjust but really want the officials to call the fouls as it will make the game better in the long run.

Along those lines, I want to share a quick story. I was at a collegiate camp and one of my clinicians told me during my sit period that I had called the most fouls in the crew and that "you don't want to be known as the guy who calls the most fouls on the crew." I remember thinking they seemed like no-brainer calls and they were all in my PCA.......However, I was told that at camp you do what your court clinician tells you and never argue, just say "OK" or "yes sir" or "thank you" so that's what I did. He said the next session I don't even want to know you are out there other than by seeing you out hustle everyone. So I worked on positioning very hard (sprinted on fast breaks to beat plays, brisk jog from C to C, etc... and didn't call a single foul for the next 7 minutes. On several occasions, my partners called into the dual coverage areas and got the fouls that needed to be called. When my session ended, this clinician jumped out of his chair and trotted to me and gave me a world class high five and said how awesome I was. I was rated #1 by this particular clinician because I didn't call anything.

There's a moderately successful D1 official who is a clinician at a camp I go to. When he was up and coming an observer took his whistle for a portion of a camp game and just had him run up and down the court...true story.

I've also had the experience where an observer complained about the entire crew calling too many foul. It was a high level AAU game (Julius Randle was playing). The game was physical and we were getting a lot of off the ball, chippy stuff. None the less, the observer was complaining. We just nodded our heads then bitched about it once we got back to the locker room.

There was never a rule on hand-checking except for what was stated the last 2 years or so. There were some guidelines, but not a rule. I have been officiating since the 90s and we used to use other philosophies that may or may not have been a foul that we call now.

Peace

It has always been the rule, they just reworded it to be more explicit. At first it was covered under illegal use of hands. It wasn't getting called properly. So, they split it out to have a separate hand checking foul. Even with that change and several attempts to get people to call what was there, it wasn't getting called. So, the spelled it out even more explicitly for those that were not getting the message.

Precisely my point. The rules makers wanted one thing and pretty much everyone, including camp instructors were doing something different than they wanted.....applying RSBQ too liberally and not calling fouls on stuff that was intended. The rules committees were, for years, saying that there was an advantage and it was affecting RSBQ but still it wasn't getting called....that officials on the whole were just not properly recognizing the advantage and he effect on RSBQ.

What is the point of doing that?

I never saw what is listed in 10-6-12 as a rule. They only created that rule after the NCAA put the wording into their rule of 10-1-4. These were not rules when I started and people would not call these unless they saw and advantage. I had actually heard of RSBQ long before these were even mentioned. Did I probably call the game similarly? Sure did, but I never had a specific reference to use in the explanation. I also went to camps where we would get in trouble for calling things that did not fit the philosophy. When these rules came into place, we had support under the rules.

To say those were always rules is not exactly correct.

Peace

Thanks for making my point.

Yup.

Contact ...
 

Three years old (2011-12):

10-6 : CONTACT
ART. 1 A player shall not hold, push, charge, trip or impede the progress
of an opponent by extending arm(s), shoulder(s), hip(s) or knee(s), or by
bending his/her body into other than a normal position; nor use any rough tactics.
ART. 2 A player shall not contact an opponent with his/her hand unless
such contact is only with the opponent’s hand while it is on the ball and is
incidental to an attempt to play the ball.
ART. 3 A player shall not use his/her hands on an opponent in any way that
inhibits the freedom of movement of the opponent or acts as an aid to a player in
starting or stopping.
ART. 4 A player shall not extend the arm(s) fully or partially other than
vertically so that freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when contact
with the arms occurs. A player may hold his/her hand(s) and arm(s) in front of
his/her own face or body for protection and to absorb force from an imminent
charge by an opponent.

4-24: ART. 5 It is not legal to use hands on an opponent which in any way inhibits
the freedom of movement of the opponent or acts as an aid to a player in starting
or stopping.
ART. 6 It is not legal to extend the arms fully or partially in a position other
than vertical so that the freedom of movement of an opponent is hindered when
contact with the arms occurs. The extension of the elbows when the hands are
on the hips or when the hands are held near the chest or when the arms are held
more or less horizontally are examples of the illegal positions used.

He was blowing all over the place, not staying in his PCA.

Gotcha, that makes more sense now.

Those items are exactly the same thing as we have today in concept. They just changed the wording to get people to make call. The specific acts that should have been a foul haven't changed.

Even if officials were not calling it under the excuse of RSBQ and advantage/disadvantage, the rulesmakers were telling us for years that such conclusions were wrong, that it WAS affecting RSBQ even if most officials thought otherwise, and that it was an advantage even if most officials thought otherwise. That had to make it absolutes so officials wouldn't keep ignoring it.

That does not say all the things that is in 10-6-12. I never said there were not contact rules, but they were not descriptive as 10-6-12 and what is in 10-6-12 were once guidelines, not specific rules.

Peace

All the things in 10-6-12 are covered in that. It was not so directly spelled out but since some many were just not getting, they spelled it out in simpler terms.

If it all covered, why add more to the rule? Never heard anyone say "Two hands on the ball handler is a foul" before the guidelines were created.

Peace

Again, thank you for proving my point.

Because we weren't officiating games the way the rules were telling us to. The NFHS tried on several occasions to get us to. Finally they just said the 4 automatics are what is listed in the 2011-12 10-6 rule, they do have an affect on RSBQ and that it isn't open for interpretation.

I fixed those for you. :D

And one for you too.

If you say so. I did not start calling "Two hands on the dribbler" as an automatic foul in a NF game until they added 10-6-12. I never looked at the other contact rules under 10-6 as the same thing and no one else seemed to believe that because they had to add the last part of that rule.

Peace

I was never told that is what the rules were. People used more RSBQ, but for 10-6-12, we do not use RSBQ. The minute those things happen, they are fouls. I do not wait for anything to decide a foul needs to be called.

Peace

And what did you fix? What was wrong with what cc55 originally posted?

From my perch: After working 5 games so far, I've called more fouls on post-play defense this season that ever before. For one reason, the POE's regarding post-play have changed my perspective. Defenders just can't seem to keep two hands on the hips and back of post players who are executing post up and spin moves. Teams are into the bonus FT's earlier in the game than I've seen before due to this.

I watched a NCAA game other night, those refs were calling lots of freedom of movement 'holds' in the post area--lotsa whistles--which is what we all want in the end.

Actually, I think that in the end what we REALLY want is the post players to get their hands off.

Not exactly true. I would imagine many of the fouls Kref saw called in the NCAA game were actually holds. In contrast to NFHS, NCAA-M can have an arm bar pressed into the back of the post player and keep it there even when the post player gets the ball, as long as they are not using that arm bar to dislodge the opponent. Basically, if they are providing resistance rather than causing movement, then they can keep their arm bar. In NFHS, as soon as the post player receives the ball, the defender has to remove the arm bar.

*Tru dat W & S: But until the B4's and B5's start playing proper post defense, then we do want all those whistles--keep poppin dat whistle baby!

Precisely my point again. You and others were not getting it. They tried to tell us that and since it obviously wan't working for you, they changed the wording to get people to get it. And you're still not realizing you were not getting it.

I get what you are saying, I just do not agree with you. It is OK to disagree. Never heard anyone suggest that 10-6-12 was the interpretation or ever saw that in practice before the rule was put into place.

Peace

And THAT was the problem.

Officials To Blame ...
 

Agree with Camron Rust. That's how the change, or lack of, was explained to us.

It might have been a problem, but who created the problem? If you want people to apply a rule that you are only assuming that others understand, you have a problem. But to suggest that was the rule is also not accurate. Also there was no such interpretation that made those things specifically a foul.

Now before the NF put the rules in place, the IHSA adopted the "NCAA Guidelines" that ended up being NF Rules a year after (or two years after) to direct how they wanted these plays to be called. And the IHSA referenced RSBQ as well as a way to determine other types of contact. And if I recall people like yourself told people not to use RSBQ and now in all interpretations RSBQ was used as a way to figure out many fouls with the players on the floor and certainly the ball handler.

Peace

The rule which says an opponent SHALL not contact an opponent with his/her hand unless such contact is with opponents hand while it on ball etc…has been in the books forever. That covers hand checking very clearly.

In the 60s, 70s and early 80s the game was played without hands and it was called if one or both were used. Late eighties and nineties hands being used more and more. Somebody decided to start applying advantage/disadvantage to it. Wrongly imo. We had individual referees trying to determine what was an advantage and what wasn't. Not good. They tried using POEs to stop hand checking but people still weren't calling it because they were thinking advantage/rsbq….Finally, it was realized that they needed to spell it out very, very, very clearly. We have the automatics. They are saying, don't think, just call it. The rule has always been there to cover hand checking.

I know what you are saying. In the early 90s the college camp clinicians were saying don't call it if player going east and west…only north or south. I didn't like it then or at any time. Offenses run east west…Anyway, the game is finally coming back around to what it was. IMO it is much better this way.

I did not say there was not a rule for hand-checking previously to the addition of Article 12.

But two hands on the ball handler was never clearly spelled out in the rules until they added Article. Those all were added how we call the game or got rid of the wiggle room of interpretation. Interpretations are different than hard-fast rules.

POEs are the worst ways to get an interpretation applied when it already does not support a rule.

This was more than what a clinician told you, there was not a specific rule to tell us what should be called. I had called hand-checking or arm bars in the game in the 90s and only was told how that was not a foul. Now when I call those specific fouls and do not have to consider RSBQ, I have a rule that I can clearly reference.

It was more than what a clinician told us to do at a camp, it was hard call something that did not have a clear rule.

Supervisors say all the time and have been saying for a very long time, "I can defend a judgment, I cannot defend not knowing the rules." Well we have rules that stops a lot of that activity and we have support to call it that way. Again, never did I ever call "two hands" on a dribbler a foul automatically like I do now. The rule makes that very clear what to do just like I have rules on verticality when a coach asks for a foul (like he did last night) and why I called a PC foul when a player had LGP. No interpretation, a rule.

Peace

Compared to two years ago, the difference is night and day. We have coaches complaining more that it doesn't get called enough, and a lot of coaches railing on the players to keep their hands off. Makes our job a little easier...

That is why the "rule" helped. Actually the first year this rule was put in place I had many coaches saying, "You cannot do that anymore" to their players. As you said, we get more crap when we do not call a foul than when we actually call a foul. Even when coaches are upset, they often direct their attitude towards the players.

Peace

During the first year, I overheard a lot of coaches saying, "Do it until you get called, then stop. If they don't call it, don't stop." Bugs me when the coach essentially tells his players to cheat unless they get caught.

It's exactly how I would coach as well -- I just wouldn't say it within earshot of the officials.

I believe the rule support has always been there and that you were right in the 90s to call hand-checking a foul. The rule said a player SHALL not place a hand…
The people saying it was not a foul didn't have rule support imo. I think those folks muddied the waters. They were of the "let em play" mindset and called certain things "game interruptors."

Again, I never said anything about not being able to call a hand-checking foul before. The signal for hand-checking has been around for probably a little over 10 years now and you could call that a foul when you deemed it to be a foul. But the rule was never this specific or was interpreted the way it is now.

Do not make the discussion more complicated than it already is.

Peace

I think you're being hopelessly naïve. Referees call the game differently. Some referees call certain things fouls, and others don't. Players who self police are putting themselves at a disadvantage -- and many young players over self police because they are worried about getting fouls.

Smart players (1) will do whatever today's referee permits and (2) will adjust to what today's referee does not. Those who do not do the first get pushed around, and those who do not do the second collect a lot of fouls.

Way back when in my high school days, my league apparently had different referee pools for San Francisco and for down the peninsula to San Jose. The SF referees were more "let them play" and the San Jose group called a lot more touch fouls. If I played in SF the way I had to play in SJ, I'd completely get my butt kicked. The game is about adjusting -- which is what, as a coach, I constantly taught: stop complaining about the call that has been made (or not made) all game -- adapt to the referee and do what is permitted today and don't do what isn't.

How is it cheating? They aren't doing it secretly, or trying to clandestinely circumvent a rule. They are testing the judgment of the officials. It's our job to correct it with our whistles.

Similar here. Started game 5 mins early so I thought I'd be home early. Visitor had 7 kids foul out. Finished with 4. I don't ever recall a varsity game where I had 4 finish. Coach whined a lot. I asked him which fouls was not really a foul. Silence. No adjustment. All our fault. Got him at home in Jan too.

At least you'll get to see if he's made any adjustments during the month he's had to prepare to see you again. :D

Lucky Me ...
 

I never worked a varsity game even remotely similar. I never observed a varsity game even remotely similar.

Karma? What did you do to deserve this? It must have been something real bad.

Still working 2 in Arizona?

100% 3-person this year. Finally.

I have gone years without working a single 2 person game in Illinois and that has been the case for like 18 years.

Peace