Out of Bounds Location

JRutledge

I like the NF mechanic the way it is. I also am not aware of a change for the NCAAM to change the mechanic either. It looks lazy to me to bounce the ball across the lane.

Peace

zm1283

We follow NFHS mechanics pretty closely, but here we are allowed to bounce across the lane in the backcourt. It helps save steps, especially in 2-person mechanics.

As far as the OP, it is a laziness issue.

Remington

From the Men's CCA Mechanics Manual:

T in-bounds ball on end-line. T is between the ball and the sideline on the table-side. If there is no defensive pressure, the T has the option of bouncing the ball to the player in-bounding the ball across the free-throw lane (indicated by location 2). This will minimize unnecessary movement by the new C and new L.

packersowner

This is helpful. Where this hurts rotation is when the C calls a foul opposite table-side with change of possession. If you're new T doesn't rotate, it causes the C to have report and go back (which is incorrect) or run to be the new L. This also potentially puts all 3 officials on the same side of the court for a period of time. I'd prefer to have the T flex opposite table side for the throw in, leave the C at the table and allow your new L to be opposite table side as well.

In college this probably doesn't matter as much because the C would report and remain the C, so no matter what your T and L can hold. Is this correct?

Raymond

packersowner wrote
This is helpful. Where this hurts rotation is when the C calls a foul opposite table-side with change of possession. If you're new T doesn't rotate, it causes the C to have report and go back (which is incorrect) or run to be the new L. This also potentially puts all 3 officials on the same side of the court for a period of time. I'd prefer to have the T flex opposite table side for the throw in, leave the C at the table and allow your new L to be opposite table side as well.

In college this probably doesn't matter as much because the C would report and remain the C, so no matter what your T and L can hold. Is this correct?

On the men's side The Calling official always ends up opposite the table.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

SC Official

packersowner wrote
This is helpful. Where this hurts rotation is when the C calls a foul opposite table-side with change of possession. If you're new T doesn't rotate, it causes the C to have report and go back (which is incorrect) or run to be the new L. This also potentially puts all 3 officials on the same side of the court for a period of time. I'd prefer to have the T flex opposite table side for the throw in, leave the C at the table and allow your new L to be opposite table side as well.

In college this probably doesn't matter as much because the C would report and remain the C, so no matter what your T and L can hold. Is this correct?

You are incorrect on NFHS mechanics. If C or T opposite calls a foul going the other way with no free throws, that official does not go tableside. You report the foul and slide down the court. It’s not a switching situation, though many times the calling official wants to go all the way up to the table to report, so at that point many officials will just go ahead and switch. But according to the manual, your understanding of the proper switch is incorrect.

Rich

Exactly. There is only one long switch and that's when the lead calls a change of possesion foul. Period.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

sdoebler

This will differ per state as the NFHS book says that officials go table side after a foul call, however IABBO states go opposite table in high school.

JRutledge

This is a minor issue. Some states do things differently as it relates to long switches. I have no idea honestly what the NF mechanic is because we have a hard fast rule in the IHSA. Any time the lead calls a foul, and we are going from BC to FC after the ball is in play, then the lead comes off the end line and goes tableside on a switch. If the Trail makes the call and we are going from BC to FC, we go back to still be the Trail.

Even if the NF has a mechanic, it sounds like many other things there are philosophies to do it a certain way regardless of what is in that book. IJS.

Peace

UNIgiantslayers

How many of you long switch vs. not? I prefer to do it and tell guys that if I'm the R, but if 2/3 don't want to, I don't push the issue. It seems like most don't want to around here. I prefer to do it because evaluators always want us doing it and it's hard to do it if you're not in the habit of doing it. I've been evaluated 4 times already this year, two of them we didn't realize we were being evaluated until he came into the locker room after the game. I don't want to get dinged on an eval for something that's so simple.

bob jenkins

UNIgiantslayers wrote
How many of you long switch vs. not? I prefer to do it and tell guys that if I'm the R, but if 2/3 don't want to, I don't push the issue.

No long switch here, except as JRut indicated. I'd prefer never. But, if the state wanted "always" (as yours seems to want), I'd always do it and not put it up to a vote (as you seem to do)

BillyMac

We tried "no long switches" here in Connecticut a few years ago. Guys got real lazy and used it as a reason (excuse) to never switch, long, short, and everything in between. It lasted a few years, and then we went back to switching on every single foul, all the time, long, short, and everything in between.