Fun With Elbows …

[BillyMac]

Disclaimer: For IAABO Eyes Only: Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO International interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...2FIE%2Bg%3D%3D

IAABO International Play Commentary
This is an intentional foul. If a player swings elbows excessively, (faster than the rest of the player’s torso), and contacts an opponent, it is at a minimum an intentional foul. If the contact is severe or the player ‘measures up’ the opponent, it is flagrant. (2012-13 POE) In this play, Red #35 swings her elbows in at a pace that exceeds the speed of the torso. This should be ruled an intentional personal foul. Officials only have rules support to rule this incidental contact or a common foul (player control foul) if the player's elbow was stationary when the contact occurred. A stationary elbow is defined as an elbow that is not moving faster than the rest of the player’s torso. (2012-13 POE)

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: Intentional Foul 36% (including me), Incidental Contact 23%, Common Foul 22%, Flagrant Foul 19%.

While I can understand the difference of opinion between an intentional foul or a flagrant foul, the percentage of commentators who believe this to be a common foul, or incidental contact, is disheartening. When will the NFHS learn that an eight year old Point of Emphasis that doesn’t make its way permanently into the rulebook is a recipe for disaster? How are inexperienced or rookie officials supposed to know this interpretation?

Stupid NFHS.

[BillyMac]

NFHS 2012-13 Points Of Emphasis

Contact above the shoulders. With a continued emphasis on reducing concussions and decreasing excessive contact situations the committee determined that more guidance is needed for penalizing contact above the shoulders.

A player shall not swing his/her arm(s) or elbow(s) even without contacting an opponent. Excessive swinging of the elbows occurs when arms and elbows are swung about while using the shoulders as pivots, and the speed of the extended arms and elbows is in excess of the rest of the body as it rotates on the hips or on the pivot foot. Currently it is a violation in Rule 9 Section 13 Article.

Examples of illegal contact above the shoulders and resulting penalties.
1. Contact with a stationary elbow may be incidental or a common foul.
2. An elbow in movement but not excessive should be an intentional foul.
3. A moving elbow that is excessive can be either an intentional foul or flagrant personal foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

IAABO International Play Commentary ... A stationary elbow is defined as an elbow that is not moving faster than the rest of the player’s torso. (2012-13 POE)

Really?

I figure we have three choices: not moving, moving but not excessively moving, and excessively moving.

Guess which choice I think "stationary" means?

[JRutledge]

Are you having a conversation with yourself?

Peace

[BillyMac]

With apologies to the Divinyls (1990).

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you having a conversation with yourself?

Yes I am.

Second post was for the good of the cause (eight year old citation for those that don't go that far back).

Third post was because I spotted an error in IAABO's explanation that I hadn't spotted earlier.

Feel free to join in my conversation, it's get boring talking to myself, although I'm getting pretty good at it during this COVID lockdown. My cat's only familiar with WNBA rules and interpretations, so I don't bother discussing basketball officiating with her.

C'mon JRutledge. Here's a great chance for you to take a much deserved potshot at IAABO. It's all teed up for you.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

C'mon JRutledge. Here's a great chance for you to take a much deserved potshot at IAABO.

I do not work under IAABO, so I really do not care what their rulings might be. What I do wish is the NF would address these issues with something more than some old interpretations and putting something in a publication every no and then from NASO. Not sure why the NF cannot make this clearer?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do wish is the NF would address these issues with something more than some old interpretations and putting something in a publication every now and then from NASO. Not sure why the NF cannot make this clearer?

Agree with 99% of your post. Not all officials belong to NASQ, so that shouldn't count.

What publication does every single high school official in the country get? A NFHS rulebbok and a NFHS casebook. Everything that rookie officials and experienced officials need to know should be in the current rulebook and current casebook (written on dead trees, or online). If points of emphasis are important, put them in the current rulebook and current casebook. If an interpretation is deleted from the casebook, the NFHS should give a reason (no longer valid due to a rule change, no longer valid due to a change in interpretation philosophy, or still valid but determined to be not needed (to save space) by the rules committee because the rule alone is sufficient for a proper interpretation).

Sure good trainers should be aware of old and odd interpretations from way back when, and teach such (assuming these are slill valid), but even trainers eventually "age out" and won't be aware of these ancient, but still valid points of emphasis and interpretations that aren't in current rulebooks and casebooks.

[SNIPERBBB]

[QUOTE=BillyMac;1041039]Really?

I figure we have three choices: not moving, moving but not excessively moving, and excessively moving.
/QUOTE]

Basically the excessive movement they are trying say is to be considered intentional/flagrant is one that is moving independent with the torso. Its they're complicated way of trying to have the turn-around-and-someone's-face-happens-to-be-in-the-way not being ruled as intentional/flagrant.

Still have nightmares from those local rules meetings where we wasted two, one-hour long meetings on that stupid thing.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Its they're complicated way of trying to have the turn-around-and-someone's-face-happens-to-be-in-the-way not being ruled as intentional/flagrant ...

That not what the point of emphasis states:

NFHS: An elbow in movement but not excessive should be an intentional foul.

If a player pivots with the arms (elbows) moving at the same rotational speed as the hips (body) and accidentally and unintentionally whacks an opponent in the head with an elbow, that's a classic example of an intentional foul under the eight year old point of emphasis.

[Multiple Sports]

BM - You were going for a personal best of consecutive posts before you were interrupted by Rut. BTW, what is your record for consecutive posts on any one thread?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

... consecutive posts ...

Gotta get to 20,000 posts any way that I can.

[crosscountry55]

BillyMac, I think the real reason for the decline was the loss of March Madness last spring. That’s when all of the Forum alumni emerge from their cocoons to declare a crusade against the trolls that we claim to despise but secretly enjoy lambasting.

I’m only half kidding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

BillyMac, I think the real reason for the decline was the loss of March Madness last spring. That’s when all of the Forum alumni emerge from their cocoons to declare a crusade against the trolls that we claim to despise but secretly enjoy lambasting.

I’m only half kidding.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the fact that much of the country did not even officiate yet or started late has hurt a lot of things when it comes to conversation. Also, there are ton more social media pages that people can go to. This format is not as fruitful anymore IMO for everyone.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

... loss of March Madness last spring.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... much of the country did not even officiate yet or started late has hurt a lot of things when it comes to conversation ... more social media pages that people can go to ...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Maybe things will get better next year when everybody's playing basketball again.

About the same number of officials, more "forums" to choose from.