Very Old Dog, New Tricks ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Didn't do it on the Referee Magazine cover either.

My nomination for Post O' The Week.

Wait? No. Post O' The Month.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge in foreground on left. I wonder if he gave the stop clock signal first? I wonder if the photographer shot his good side?

[bucky]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

My nomination for Post O' The Week.

Wait? No. Post O' The Month.

I have always done it the current way. I did it incorrectly for many years and now the rules have finally caught up with me.

I wonder, but not for a long time, how two officials had the same signal. I also wonder how Jrut apparently got a third arm/thumb

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bucky

I have always done it the current way. I did it incorrectly for many years and now the rules have finally caught up with me.

I wonder, but not for a long time, how two officials had the same signal. I also wonder how Jrut apparently got a third arm/thumb

He is not showing the entire cover. There are two kids on the floor in this picture and that is the arm of one of them on the floor.

Peace

[thumpferee]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

He is not showing the entire cover. There are two kids on the floor in this picture and that is the arm of one of them on the floor.

Peace

Ah, he gave you an opening and you misses it!

[Bad Zebra]

I’m at about a 50% success rate at this point. I’m in the same camp as JRut...I find it clumsy, dumb and unnecessary. I wonder where there was such a problem with conflicting signals that this was even raised at the rules meeting. I’d file this one in the category: Solution in search of a problem.

You’d think the committee would be busy enough with arm sleeves, leg sleeves, compression shorts and tights.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra

I’m at about a 50% success rate at this point. I’m in the same camp as JRut...I find it clumsy, dumb and unnecessary. I wonder where there was such a problem with conflicting signals that this was even raised at the rules meeting. I’d file this one in the category: Solution in search of a problem.

You’d think the committee would be busy enough with arm sleeves, leg sleeves, compression shorts and tights.

This to me is no different than one official calling a foul and another official calling a violation. You figure out what happens first too in those situations and you can likely only pick one anyway. Why did they have to act like a held ball was so different? Saw a game last night where officials called a timeout instead of a held ball and that did not eliminate the confusion or the controversy. Just as you stated.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

This to me is no different than one official calling a foul and another official calling a violation. You figure out what happens first too in those situations and you can likely only pick one anyway. Why did they have to act like a held ball was so different? Saw a game last night where officials called a timeout instead of a held ball and that did not eliminate the confusion or the controversy. Just as you stated.

Peace

Exactly. It doesn't solve anything. In fact, it creates more confusion IMO. Before, you at least knew what your partner had with thumbs up. Now, you have no idea if it is a violation, held ball, or timeout but you still have different signals if one has a foul.

And that is why I proposed that Oregon not adopt that change and the state basketball committee agreed.

[RefRich]

I hate it. I feel like a newbie every time on a jump ball. Not sure why they really felt the need for this change, regardless of what Ms. Wynns states.g

Of course, I struggled with the two-hand reporting for a few games in the beginning as well. I think I've been part of a held ball only 2 times this year so far so not a lot of practice.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by RefRich

I struggled with the two-hand reporting for a few games in the beginning as well.

Me too. If I survived that, I can survive this.