Things the Mechanics Manual Doesn't Tell You

[ilyazhito]

Is there an advantage to walking and talking vs reporting from a stationary position in the reporting area? This is a mechanic that some high school and men's college officials do, even though it is not approved for those levels.
IMO, stationary reporting allows the scorer to better see and understand the information that the official is giving on fouls, but walking and talking may be faster for the official.

I understand that when new, follow the book when in doubt. When I get more experienced, then I can deviate if allowed to by local assigners. If I move up to higher-level college (D2/D1), as long as I use proper HS floor coverage, I can use college signals in a HS game (although I'll probably try not to mix the two). If I get to the G-League, this becomes irrelevant .

Well, officials receive the rating, and assignors can see what rating the official in question has (varsity or subvarsity). [Captain Obvious On] Caveat: BillyMac's rating system can differ from yours and mine. [Captain Obvious Off]

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Is there an advantage to walking and talking vs reporting from a stationary position in the reporting area? This is a mechanic that some high school and men's college officials do, even though it is not approved for those levels.

IMO, stationary reporting allows the scorer to better see and understand the information that the official is giving on fouls, but walking and talking may be faster for the official.

Advantage? Not really. It is probably done because it often does not matter if you stop or not in most cases. For the record, both Men's College and HS have the same table reporting mechanics as it relates to procedures. If you use your voice and clear the players, it really matters little if you are completely stopped or you are moving a little bit.

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I understand that when new, follow the book when in doubt. When I get more experienced, then I can deviate if allowed to by local assigners. If I move up to higher-level college (D2/D1), as long as I use proper HS floor coverage, I can use college signals in a HS game (although I'll probably try not to mix the two). If I get to the G-League, this becomes irrelevant .

I think most officials make an effort to use the mechanics that are subscribed in the book when we start. But then you realize that there are things no one really cares about or holds you to in much detail. I know for me the more experienced I got, the less anyone worried about when I stopped reporting a foul because I handled coaches or players a certain way.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

BillyMac's rating system can differ from yours and mine.

RATINGS GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION

APPEARANCE AND CONDITIONING
Official is in physical condition and exhibits hustle and energy through the game.
Official’s uniform and overall appearance is neat, clean and well kept.

MECHANICS
Utilizes proper mechanics, up-to-date techniques and procedures as detailed in the IAABO Officials Manual.
Performs accurate foul reporting and clock administration.
Has a resonant, strong voice that is supported by proper mechanics for purpose of clarification

TEAM WORK
Has the ability to work effectively as a “team” with his/her fellow official.
Arrives on time; actively participate in the pre-game.
Actively participate in the post-game.
Accepts criticism.
Shares the responsibility and avoids attempts to shift the blame.

JUDGEMENT
Presents a thorough knowledge of the rules of basketball.
Uses unbiased judgment and common sense in applying the rules of the game.
Appears to make his/her decision with consideration to the effect the calling, or equally as important,
the not calling of a rule violation will have.
Is consistent in all calls regardless of situation or point of time in the game. For example, consistency
in the determination of a block vs. a charge.
Reacts quickly enough to make a decision at the moment of its occurrence.
Makes quick and positive decisions, especially with respect to the “close ones”.

GAME MANAGEMENT
Demonstrates control of the game. Leadership, able to run the game
Communicates with coaches, partners and table.
Is courteous and polite
Exhibits a confident manner i.e. attention to detail, alertness, firmness, and timeliness of his/her
reaction to a situation.
Remains consistent when calling violations or fouls without regard to the score, whom it may hurt,
or how it may effect future relations with the coach. Has a quiet influence on the game that relieves
tensions and creates a steady effect upon contestants (both players and coaches alike).
Has control of his/her emotions.
Takes the time to prevent an error from being made

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Is there an advantage to walking and talking vs reporting from a stationary position in the reporting area?

Do whatever your evaluators and assigner expect, maybe it's "by the book", maybe it's not. Ask your local evaluators. Ask your local assigner. What were you taught by your local training committee as a rookie official? What do your local trainers say at meetings, and clinics?

That's the way to make your way up the ladder in your local association. That's the way to move from subvarsity games to varsity games. That's the way to get more assignments. That's the way to get better assignments.

Take the advice of Saint Ambrose, the ancient basketball official, "Si fueris Romae, Romano vivito more; si fueris alibi, vivito sicut ibi".

If your high school Latin is rusty: “If you are in Rome, live in the Roman way; if you are elsewhere, live as they do there”.

[ilyazhito]

I was taught by the book in that regard. I'm guessing that''s the standard way that IAABO cadets are taught. To this day, I stop in the reporting area, no matter whether I work IAABO games or not. Real-life, there is no reason other than personal preference for walking or stopping?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Real-life, there is no reason other than personal preference for walking or stopping?

You are absolutely wrong.

Real life is doing what is expected of you to be successful in your local association.

That's real life.

If those who evaluate you expect you to go to the reporting area and stop, then you go to the reporting area and stop. If your assigner expects you to go to the reporting area and stop, then you go to the reporting area and stop. If you were trained to go to the reporting area and stop, then you go to the reporting area and stop. If you are trained at meetings and clinics to go to the reporting area and stop, then you go to the reporting area and stop.

If you're expected to do otherwise, then you do otherwise.

Why? Reasons? Sure, someone can tell you a nice, feel good, bedtime story that there's less chance of an error in reporting fouls if you go all the way to the reporting area and stop. Maybe, once upon a time, a sixth grade student scorekeeper in a middle school game, or an assistant football coach scorekeeper in a junior varsity game, or a retired biology teacher scorekeeper in a varsity game, made an error and a star player erroneously fouled out, thus losing the state championship, said player losing his chance at a college scholarship, possibly due to some sloppy reporting by an official, but regardless, the bottom line is one does what one is expected to do to be successful.

The reason why is unimportant, and possibly irrelevant, meeting expectations and becoming a successful official in your local area is important, of utmost importance.

In basketball officiating, that's real life.

Take the advice of Alfred, Lord Tennyson, the great nineteenth century basketball official, "Theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die".

https://youtu.be/mEtcHdDyEvo

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

I was taught by the book in that regard. I'm guessing that''s the standard way that IAABO cadets are taught. To this day, I stop in the reporting area, no matter whether I work IAABO games or not. Real-life, there is no reason other than personal preference for walking or stopping?

I think this is the part you seem to not get. Mechanics are often personal preferences. Someone suggests this should be done and they put it in a book to tell everyone they should do it that way. It does not mean there is not another way or a variation is a tragic event. Actually "walking and talking" can be good to speed up the process and get to the next situation quicker. But we have a reporting area and often people will not get there when they do not stop or try to report a basic foul. That is my experience, but not what you see asked for.

You are going to find many mechanics that have someone suggesting it should be done this specific way and others who will do something else thinking that way is more efficient. And many of those situations will never have an evaluator saying a word, not a single word either way. If I am acting as a clinician and I am talking to you about how you report fouls in that much detail, I am probably not finding much about your officiating to discuss. It does not mean I will not mention the mechanics you use, but it will not be an all-day focus unless I am clearly confused by your reporting process.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are going to find many mechanics that have someone suggesting it should be done this specific way ...

It depends on who that "someone" is? If that "someone" is an evaluator (or maybe an assigner) who will have a major impact on one's "movement up the ladder of success" in that local organization, then one should take it as more than a simple suggestion. Same thing if that "someone" is a local trainer (clinician) who is educating everyone in that local organization, expecting them all to do it that one, consistent, way (the same one, consistent way that the evaluators (assigner) will be observing and basing their evaluations on).

On my local board, mechanics are only a small part of one's evaluation by those who can have an impact one's assignments (number and level of games). Things like play calling, game management, and court coverage are much more important, but mechanics are still part of the equation, and they're usually the easiest forms of advice to follow. Some new officials may have difficulty calling a block/charge, or keeping coaches under control, but they can certainly stand where they have been taught to stand during a time out (which may include moving one's position to discuss a situation with one's partner, or walking over to the table to double check something, some flexibility can be a good thing).

On the other hand, if the trainers (clinicians), evaluators, and the assigner are not on the same page regarding mechanics, and the evaluation, and importance, of such, then things can become problematic. I don't work for such a disjointed, inconsistent, local organization (but I'm sure that they might exist somewhere).

Again, the usual caveat, "When in Rome ...". Some organizations may be a lot more flexible when it comes to mechanics, and the evaluation, and importance, of such, than others. That doesn't necessarily mean that one way is good, and one way is bad, they're just different.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... unless I am clearly confused by your reporting process.

Good point. While some of us may have our own opinions, based on our own local customs, about good mechanics, and the evaluation, and importance, of such, we can all agree on what bad mechanics are.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think this is the part you seem to not get. Mechanics are often personal preferences. Someone suggests this should be done and they put it in a book to tell everyone they should do it that way. It does not mean there is not another way or a variation is a tragic event. Actually "walking and talking" can be good to speed up the process and get to the next situation quicker. But we have a reporting area and often people will not get there when they do not stop or try to report a basic foul. That is my experience, but not what you see asked for.

You are going to find many mechanics that have someone suggesting it should be done this specific way and others who will do something else thinking that way is more efficient. And many of those situations will never have an evaluator saying a word, not a single word either way. If I am acting as a clinician and I am talking to you about how you report fouls in that much detail, I am probably not finding much about your officiating to discuss. It does not mean I will not mention the mechanics you use, but it will not be an all-day focus unless I am clearly confused by your reporting process.

Peace

We strongly emphasize stopping to report here at the HS level. The purpose is twofold. First, you have a very large variety of table crews with widely varying levels of attentiveness and ability. Getting close enough (not too close) and stopping before reporting improves the communication from official to table. Second, many officials race through the whole thing. Making them come to a stop slows them down and, again, it improves the communication. And it will get mentioned on evaluations. Communication is a big part of what we do and not doing it clearly only causes trouble. However, at some level, when you get quality table crews and quality officials, the complications of walking and talking are not really a big deal anymore.

[ilyazhito]

This is a thing that I notice as an official that concerns me: bad communication. It may be surprising that I am the one saying this, because I have Asperger Syndrome, a developmental disability that affects communication, but I have been confused whenever I see bad communication among officials and between officials and auxiliary personnel (no signals about last second shots (1 minute, my responsibility), fast reporting without being in the reporting area (often occurs when HS officials try to walk and talk), not confirming communication signals, putting the ball in play with substitutes at the table, not confirming count/game situation ,etc.). This is especially when it happens on crews where I work, because I might not know whether the other officials understood me when they do not respond. Bad communication often happens together with bad mechanics (not stopping the clock when required, not sweeping the floor, unapproved signals) and bad positioning. These three things result in officials making incorrect rulings.

Mechanics like pointing at the shot clock or 1 finger in the air might look ridiculous, but they exist to promote awareness of the game situation (10 seconds on the shot clock and under 1 minute on the game clock respectively). Being aware allows officials to be in good position, such as the Lead knowing what is happening and rotating in a rotation situation, and his partners picking him up. Stopping the clock is both a mechanic required by rule and an awareness mechanic, to ensure that officials and the game clock operator know that the game clock should stop (or not start). This is why I might be willing to compromise on HS vs college foul signals, but not on communication or on stopping the clock. Ifor you are working with me, and you want to use specific communication signals that are not in the (HS/college) mechanics book, or use these signals in a way other than what is written, let me know, so that I can adjust.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

This is a thing that I notice as an official that concerns me: bad communication ...

Stop it. Just stop it. Please.

I know that it can be frustrating working with less capable partners, or observing less capable officials from your local association, but it's part of the job. We all have to do it at one time or another.

Don't worry about what others do wrong. Unless you're a trainer, clinician, evaluator, or assigner, these "bad" mechanics are out of your control.

If you know what's right, and what's expected of you, do those things. That is under your control.

If you want to nitpick yourself (like I do after every game) that's fine, but don't nitpick your partners, or others from your local association

If you want to offer others some constructive criticism (note I said some), face to face, to help them improve, that's fine, but don't nitpick them here on the Forum, or anywhere else for that matter. It's not constructive.

Everybody has to work with "bad" partners, it's part of the job. Work harder, overcompensate, be more vigilante, etc. Maybe these "bad" mechanic partners make up for it by being great officials in other aspects of the game, play calling, court coverage, game management, etc. Or maybe they're just great guys that people like being around, good sense of humor, caring, good story tellers, interested in their partner's lives, all around nice guys, etc.

God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference. (Reinhold Niebuhr, 1892-1971)

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

This is a thing that I notice as an official that concerns me: bad communication...

You shouldn't need to see one finger in the air to know that the game clock is under 1:00 and you shouldn't need to see the OTO indicating that he has the last-second shot to know that it's true. When you get to the varsity level, your partners will look at you like you're crazy if you act like you can't function without these visible signals. And based on your posts, you clearly psych yourself out over petty things that you have no control over. You keep talking about the G-league: have you noticed that NBA officials never hold one finger in the air at the end of a period? That's one of the many things you're going to have to get over if you want to advance.

Also, hate to break it to you but clock operators are not looking for our hand to stop the clock or looking for a chop to start it. They are listening for the whistle and watching for the ball to be touched. So, while it's all well and good to use these mechanics and they serve their purpose, let's stop pretending like they are more important than they are.

Also, I assume you are, for all intents and purposes, a sub-varsity official. You are going to have subpar partners who are poor communicators. And it will still be true when you get to the higher levels. The officiating Utopia that you desire is not going to happen, so you might as well stop worrying about it.

Again, as you move up, your play-calling and game management will be exponentially more important than the nitty-gritty of your mechanics. You don't seem to understand this as almost all of your posts have to do with opining about officials who don't follow their mechanics manuals to a T, rather than specific plays or situations to break down. Until you start putting more thought into the more important aspects of your game, you can kiss your dream of getting to college/G-league goodbye.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Mechanics like pointing at the shot clock or 1 finger in the air might look ridiculous, but they exist to promote awareness of the game situation (10 seconds on the shot clock and under 1 minute on the game clock respectively).

When you first came on this board, you had several posts about how you always looked at the clock on every change of possession and everytime the ball crossed a line, etc.

If you are doing that, you don't need the 1-minute signal to tell you how much time is left in the period.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

We strongly emphasize stopping to report here at the HS level. The purpose is twofold. First, you have a very large variety of table crews with widely varying levels of attentiveness and ability. Getting close enough (not too close) and stopping before reporting improves the communication from official to table.

Well, that is the same case in most small college table personnel as well.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Second, many officials race through the whole thing. Making them come to a stop slows them down and, again, it improves the communication. And it will get mentioned on evaluations. Communication is a big part of what we do and not doing it clearly only causes trouble. However, at some level, when you get quality table crews and quality officials, the complications of walking and talking are not really a big deal anymore.

I do not think that has much to do with whether an official stops and reports. I see many officials stop and cannot report very clearly because they have clearly not practiced their mechanics or they are thinking too fast. I am not so sure that that is the reason many officials look sloppy.

Peace