Three Seconds Not One's Best Call Of The Night ...

[BillyMac]

I've watched several IAABO International and local IAABO board Zoom "webinars" that have suggested that officials should never talk/warn/encourage/coach players to avoid three second violations during live ball situations at all levels of play.

For me, this is pretty much exactly the opposite of what I learned as a rookie official forty years ago.

Comments and thoughts from IAABO and non-IAABO Forum members?

[SC Official]

Just tonight I yelled “Get out!” at a player who was close. He got the message.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Just tonight I yelled “Get out!” at a player who was close. He got the message.

I never yell "Get Out" because after all they are allowed to be there

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

... they are allowed to be there

Not if he's an offensive player, and the ball is in his team's control in his team's frontcourt, and he has been in the lane for more than three seconds, and he and is team are gaining an advantage not intended by rule, unless he is dribbling in or moving immediately to try for goal.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Not if he's an offensive player, and the ball is in his team's control in his team's frontcourt, and he has been in the lane for more than three seconds, and he and is team are gaining an advantage not intended by rule, unless he is dribbling in or moving immediately to try for goal.

I don't yell anything. Only time I raise my voice so that everybody can hear it is when players are trying to stir up trouble.

If a player is in the paint too long and it has no effect on the play I will quietly say something to them one-on-one at the earliest opportunity. But a warning isn't a something that should be expected before a 3 second call can be made.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... a warning isn't a something that should be expected before a 3 second call can be made.

Agree. Well worded.

But if a player is just aimlessly and cluelessly wandering around in the lane for three seconds, not gaining any advantage, I might give a warning to player (and hit him with a violation if he doesn't comply) to preempt a coach from "interacting" with me.

[crosscountry55]

You have to let three-second violations find you. If you go looking for them, you’re bound to miss a lot of other far more important stuff.

That matches my current association’s expectation. A few years back, one of our junior leagues implored us to call more three-second violations, probably because all of the parents remember every third whistle being a three-second violation 30+ years ago when they played. As if the improvement in game flow since the late 1980s is some kind of mortal wound to their basketball souls!

Anyway, we gave ‘em what they asked for....and they were sorry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

I just say "Lane, lane, lane" and they get out. Just like I tell them other things that stop or avoid fouls or violations. Unless someone bigger tells us to do differently, then I am going to keep doing that. This sounds like high school purest saying this mess.

This is what I am talking about Billy.

Peace

[Nevadaref]

I agree with you that the philosophy has changed from thirty years ago. The current instruction is to just officiate the game and to refrain from coaching the players. It is not our role in the game to provide instruction.

I too learned under the philosophy of talking players out of violations or fouls, but have transitioned to not doing that anymore.

Today, I simply pass on calling fouls or violations which are trivial or have no impact upon the conduct of the game. So I would just ignore the three-second violation, until it was blatant or created a clear advantage for the offensive player.

The current philosophy is that we should stick to calling the game and that the players and coaches will adjust to the calls. The old verbal instruction is passé. Now it is simply blow the whistle.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I agree with you that the philosophy has changed from thirty years ago. The current instruction is to just officiate the game and to refrain from coaching the players. It is not our role in the game to provide instruction.

I too learned under the philosophy of talking players out of violations or fouls, but have transitioned to not doing that anymore.

Today, I simply pass on calling fouls or violations which are trivial or have no impact upon the conduct of the game. So I would just ignore the three-second violation, until it was blatant or created a clear advantage for the offensive player.

The current philosophy is that we should stick to calling the game and that the players and coaches will adjust to the calls. The old verbal instruction is passé. Now it is simply blow the whistle.

YMMV. It is still frequently encouraged in my neck of the woods to talk players out of silly fouls and violations.

[BigT]

Question

If one team has a great post player and great outside shooters. And the post player stays in the key causing the defense to withdraw from guarding the 3 point line providing shot after shot. Isn't that an advantage? Remember a NFHS article stating that was causing an advantage even if it didn't go to the big guy.

I found it interesting and will probably not be considered an advantage by most here. I did find it interesting.

I do agree it should only be caused if it gives an advantage. Any thoughts?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

... one of our junior leagues implored us to call more three-second violations ... Anyway, we gave ‘em what they asked for... and they were sorry.