Preliminary Signaling

[j51969]

Originally Posted by Rich

I wish observers cared more about positioning and playcalling. I assign for 20+ schools and I couldn't care less if officials give a prelim.

+1

Fitness, Approachability, Rule Knowledge, and above all "Call Accuracy". If you are getting these right you are probably doing the little things as well.

[Rich]

I give the "two" every time. But whether it's a hack, a push, a hold or whatever means absolutely nothing at the spot of the foul.

Getting plays right is job 1.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I give the "two" every time. But whether it's a hack, a push, a hold or whatever means absolutely nothing at the spot of the foul.

Getting plays right is job 1.

I do agree with that, but part of the job is to convince everyone that we got the play right. And a big part of the job is are signals and when we give those signals. If the observers (everyone in the gym) has no idea what we had, it does not matter how much we actually got the play right. I have had coaches complain more about plays where we got right, but they did not see our signal and it got them even more upset.

I had a coach yesterday want an explanation on every call I made and if he would have paid attention to my presentation at the table, he would have seen and heard what I had. I am very descriptive at the table what I called and use my voice.

Peace

[Rich]

At the table I signal. We're all talking about the spot of the foul....where giving a preliminary signal on a garden variety foul is just not needed.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

At the table I signal. We're all talking about the spot of the foul....where giving a preliminary signal on a garden variety foul is just not needed.

I know the difference, my point is that it is part of the package. No one says anything that it trumps getting the play right. But when we blow our whistle it matters what else we did or we would not raise out hand and we would only go to the table and report the foul.

Peace

[Rich]

Of course. But so many people will address the signals and the rest of the garnish and not spend enough time on whether the call was correct and, if not, why.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

Of course. But so many people will address the signals and the rest of the garnish and not spend enough time on whether the call was correct and, if not, why.

Yes, because unless we have replay we can only address the call so many ways. I have been a clinician for years and I rarely ever address the call other than to ask the official, "What did you see?" When they give me the answer, I am looking for their explanation more than if they got the play right. I am looking for why they came to that conclusion. I might have been standing in a position that did not see the play as they did. I find nothing wrong with discussing the overall procedure when I can see what they signaled, but might not know if they actually got the call right. Video review IMO is the best way to start evaluating calls. And in most situation that is not practical at the time. Again, just an opinion.

Peace

[BlueDevilRef]

Ironic issue around these parts is that the clinicians all make it a big point during training and camps but then you rarely see the veterans doing it when you go to watch them in games. I prefer the premium signal on calls that aren't just plainly obvious when I'm watching. When I'm calling, I try to do it all calls so I can make a habit of it. To me, it lends credibility to the call but I understand that some don't believe that way. I would say NFHS cares though, since it is part of the four bullet points to calling a foul.

Btw, Go Chiefs!!!!!!!!!!


I wish I had a cool signature

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Was talking with my partner last night about preliminary signaling. We were observed last night and one of the points brought up was that we need to do more of it. The powers that be where I'm from have made preliminary signaling a big deal. I've gotten better at it but obviously still not 100%.

Anyway, he does some JUCO basketball, and he said that they want NO preliminary signals. Is that consistent with your experience at that level or higher? What's the reasoning behind it?

I ask merely out of curiosity.

Blocks/charges only is what NCAA-M wants.

I follow that for both college and HS.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[Rich]

I use the hit to the head at the spot.

I saw a one-armed Frankenstein at my kid's game this weekend.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Rich

I use the hit to the head at the spot.

I saw a one-armed Frankenstein at my kid's game this weekend.

You see a lot of goofy stuff watching your kid play. Entertaining or does it make you mad? ;p

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by Dad

You see a lot of goofy stuff watching your kid play. Entertaining or does it make you mad? ;p

I keep telling him to make varsity so he gets better refs . . . as I've told him, he's getting the refs that are either new and learning on don't care and he needs to just roll with it, which he mostly does.

In fairness, while there are some odd calls, overall most of the games are reasonably called -- typically there is a relatively consistent foul bar. (Seems to be from the stands that the dribbling offenses, particularly carrying, are less consistent -- and sometimes the two refs are calling differently, which can be frustrating for the players.) And I probably notice more of the quirks than most from my general interest in officiating and lurking around here.

I think I get far less frustrated than many parents -- I'm more likely to accept that a call was right even when it goes against us, and I appreciate how difficult the job is, especially with a two man team. (On many obviously missed calls, I can tell that neither ref had a decent angle, and it is obvious to us in the stands because we did end up with a good angle on a particular play.)

So the short answer, is that I really don't get particularly mad. Perplexed and bemused, perhaps, but not worth getting mad, so long as (which has been the case the vast majority of the time) it is clear that the refs really are trying and working hard. (I do find myself getting mad when it is clearly a ref who is not working hard and appears to have accepted JV hoops as merely a way to get a check this afternoon . . . )