Mechanics and clock situations (Video)

[ilyazhito]

In Play 1, the blarge was handled correctly (both calls were reported to the table, and the ball was given to Red). However, both officials should not have immediately signalled their fouls. I don't know if the L and C were watching NBA videos the day before, because L immediately came up with a punch, instead of stopping the clock, and C did the hitting-the-hips, which is an NCAAW/NBA signal. If L and C both put up a fist, the clock would stop, and both would have a moment to decide whose call it is, and what the call is, and thus the double-foul scenario would be avoided. In this play, the drive started in C's PCA (Trail is not in the picture, because it is a transition play), so the call should ideally go to C.

For play 2, the off-ball officials need to ensure that the clock does not run following the held-ball signal (which this crew failed to do). The held ball was signalled and the whistle blown with 11.5 seconds remaining in the 3rd quarter, but the clock ran down all the way to 4.5. The on-ball official also needs to do a time check when the clock is supposed to stop, to avoid a situation like this. Normally, officials should check the clock on every transition sequence (in shot clock games, all officials monitor both clocks every time the clock starts, in transition, when they arrive in the front court, and when the clocks stop), as well as when the clock is supposed to start (stop). Not doing this led to the technical foul, and could possibly cause the officials to not be invited back to the IHSA tournament next year. In an NCAA game, they might be suspended for a clock error like this. [Another reason why I would encourage the nationwide adoption of a shot clock is that it keeps the officials on their toes, by making them constantly aware of clock status. Maybe with a shot clock, these officials would detect that 2 clocks are running when they shouldn't, and would have to have a long discussion with the table to correct both clock errors, and avoid this embarrassing situation. ]

[johnny d]

Jeff you were probably watching the game, either in person or on tv. I did neither. Was the tech on the Marian bench or did that dick head, Taylor, get it? Either way, I would not be surprised, they always have a whole cluster **** of *******s on their bench.

[ODog]

Play 1: They handled the aftermath well and properly. Surprising that the C held his fist patiently for so long and then somehow still came down with the block signal, He looked like he was just going to leave it up there, which would've been perfect. Clearly, he didn't know the L had called anything.

And the announcers had no clue a double foul was ruled.

Play 2: The technical almost certainly was on bench personnel, because the head coach seemed to have no issue with it whatsoever.

To answer the question posed in the video -- "Was the bench upset about the time on the clock?" -- "the bench" doesn't get to be upset about anything. The bench gets to STFU. The coach gets to be upset ... that's it.

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

C did the hitting-the-hips, which is an NCAAW/NBA signal

Huh? The open hands on the hips is the official signal according to the NFHS, NCAA-M, NCAA-W, and NBA rule sets however in the latter three it is nearly universal to use the fists on hips blocking signal.

Originally Posted by ODog

To answer the question posed in the video -- "Was the bench upset about the time on the clock?" -- "the bench" doesn't get to be upset about anything. The bench gets to STFU. The coach gets to be upset ... that's it.

Yup.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AremRed

The open hands on the hips is the official signal according to the NFHS, NCAA-M, NCAA-W, and NBA rule sets however in the latter three it is nearly universal to use the fists on hips blocking signal.

Most (but not all) high school officials here in my little corner of Connecticut use fists. The best that I can do is to be half wrong, fists at preliminary, open hands at the reporting site. Old habits die hard.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Most (but not all) high school officials here in my little corner of Connecticut use fists. The best that I can do is to be half wrong, fists at preliminary, open hands at the reporting site. Old habits die hard.

Unfortunately my state office gives way too much of a crap about not using "college mechanics" in high school games.

[constable]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Most (but not all) high school officials here in my little corner of Connecticut use fists. The best that I can do is to be half wrong, fists at preliminary, open hands at the reporting site. Old habits die hard.

The fists looks much better than the open hands if you ask me.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by constable

The fists looks much better than the open hands if you ask me.

Agree.

[ilyazhito]

Originally Posted by constable

The fists looks much better than the open hands if you ask me.

I would disagree. There is a reason that FIBA, NCAAM, and NFHS prescribe the open hands signal, and the open-hands signal is the official signal in the signal chart at the back of the NBA rulebook. The FIBA signal looks like the official slaps his hips with his hands, and then closes them (Pay close attention at the 8:15 mark of the video). That seems to me to be as forceful and authoritative as the fists on hips signal approved by NCAAW and commonly used in the NBA.

The FIBA approach to reporting fouls seems to me to be more logical than either the NFHS or NBA approaches, because NFHS seems excessive and formalistic (verbally inform the offender, give a preliminary signal at the spot of the foul, show the consequence of the foul (designated spot and direction or number of free throws), to repeat the result (shot counts or does not), signal, and consequence at the table. The only new thing is signalling the offender's number and color), and NBA seems lazy (the foul is reported at the spot of the foul, and I don't know if the table gets informed of the foul or not), but FIBA is a happy medium (The official points at the offender with the "bird-dog" signal, and shows the consequence (designated spot and direction or free throws). For some fouls (player/team control fouls, or if a shot is involved, the official gives a preliminary signal at the spot) Finally, the official reports the result of the shot (score or no score) if relevant, the number and color of the offender, the specific foul signal, and the consequence).

I think that the lead in the OP forgot a basic fundamental, to referee the defense. He may have focused on the fact that the offensive player ran into the defender, and overlooked the fact that the defender was not in LGP (which the center did get). This may also be the explanation for the controversial Kevin Durant/LeBron James play near the end of regulation in Game 1 of the NBA Finals. Mauer may have regarded LeBron James as legal when he should not have, and called the charge on Durant. However, James did not have LGP (he was in the restricted area when Durant began his upward motion, and continued moving towards Durant, which would be illegal even if the restricted area were not in play), and this may be why Brothers also blew his whistle, and the officials later reviewed the play, and reversed it to a block by LeBron James. I know about it, because I have had many close plays as the Lead where I have had to give a charge (or call a block) due to last-second changes in the defender's action and positioning.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by ODog

Play 1: Surprising that the C held his fist patiently for so long and then somehow still came down with the block signal, He looked like he was just going to leave it up there,

This was exactly my biggest take-away from the play. He did a great job of just staying with the fist and then went block anyway. What was he looking at and what was he waiting for??

[ilyazhito]

He was surprised by L making the call and not noticing that C had a fist. This made C think "oh crap, the L jumped the gun. Now I need to make my call." This made him do his lackluster block signal (incidentally, the call by C was correct, the defender did not have legal guarding position at the point of contact). Typically, in a double whistle situation, officials have to post the fist, see if another call has been made (if there is a fist or palm in the air), look at the other person making the call, and decide whose call to take. However, the L immediately went to a preliminary signal, making this resolution impossible.

I would be interested to hear the IHSA observer's take on that game, if there was one.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Typically, in a double whistle situation, officials have to post the fist, see if another call has been made (if there is a fist or palm in the air), look at the other person making the call, and decide whose call to take. However, the L immediately went to a preliminary signal, making this resolution impossible.

So he's looking right at the L, sees an obvious PC signal and punch, but doesn't see a fist first, so he signals block? I'm not buying that, personally.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

... in a double whistle situation, officials have to post the fist, see if another call has been made (if there is a fist or palm in the air), look at the other person making the call, and decide whose call to take.

Here on my little corner of Connecticut, where 95+% of our games are two person, when double whistles, and double fist signals, occur in a block/charge situation, in the absence of any preliminary signals, rule of thumb is that we automatically allow the lead to make the call. This may not be in any major mechanics manual, including IAABO, and I'm sure that there are better methods, but that's what we have been doing here for over thirty-five years, and it becomes second nature to us.

Of course, that assumes that both officials realize that two whistles sounded (think very loud gym with whistles sounding at the same exact time), and that one official (or both) doesn't quickly want to sell his call with an emphatic preliminary signal.

I haven't had a blarge in almost four decades of basketball officiating, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen in my next game.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

He was surprised by L making the call and not noticing that C had a fist. This made C think "oh crap, the L jumped the gun. Now I need to make my call." This made him do his lackluster block signal (incidentally, the call by C was correct, the defender did not have legal guarding position at the point of contact). Typically, in a double whistle situation, officials have to post the fist, see if another call has been made (if there is a fist or palm in the air), look at the other person making the call, and decide whose call to take. However, the L immediately went to a preliminary signal, making this resolution impossible.

I would be interested to hear the IHSA observer's take on that game, if there was one.

That's supposition makes no sense.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

He was surprised by L making the call and not noticing that C had a fist. This made C think "oh crap, the L jumped the gun. Now I need to make my call." This made him do his lackluster block signal (incidentally, the call by C was correct, the defender did not have legal guarding position at the point of contact). Typically, in a double whistle situation, officials have to post the fist, see if another call has been made (if there is a fist or palm in the air), look at the other person making the call, and decide whose call to take. However, the L immediately went to a preliminary signal, making this resolution impossible.

I would be interested to hear the IHSA observer's take on that game, if there was one.

I will give you some insight in what an observer might be thinking (considering I am in that position on many levels). Don't have a blarge. It is not that complicated. Post your foul and see your partner. Expect a call from your partner in a dual coverage area.

Again, not that complicated.

Peace