Fun With Signals ...

[BillyMac]

IAABO Make The Call Video

Was this contact properly ruled a charging foul? Did the Lead official use proper signals to rule the contact a player control foul?

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...V7Hpo0Ug%3D%3D

Reminder: IAABO uses its own mechanics and signals (which doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum), that may not necessarily be the same as NFHS mechanics and signals.

Three choices: This is a player control foul. This is a blocking foul. The defensive player "flopped".

My comment: This is a player control foul. Defender Black #1 obtained legal guarding position in the lane and ball handler White #14 knocked her over. Lead gave an incorrect signal (the team control signal) for the player control foul, didn’t go all the way to the reporting area to report the foul, and it appears that she wasn’t going to switch with her partner (probably local customs).

[bob jenkins]

PC (or maybe TC if the ball was already loose, but that's splitting hairs) foul.

I'll leave the signalling out, because it depends on what's in use in a given area (and whether the official judged it to be TC or PC).

[JRutledge]

Clearly a PC foul. Yes, she uses the wrong signal, but only people that might care is the supervisor or state organization that assigns this game.

But she did raise her hand for the foul which is the part I liked the most.

Peace

[Raymond]

I see a strong, confident signal. She gives a good first impression to anybody watching her whether or not she used the precise signal that should have been used.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... maybe TC if the ball was already loose ... what's in use in a given area (and whether the official judged it to be TC or PC).

Agree. I had to watch the video twice to see if the ball had popped loose before, or after the contact (it was after), hard to see by the Lead on the other side of the lane.

Regarding "areas", we experimented with "no long switches" here in Connecticut for year, or two, and went back to long switches because officials weren't switching on player control fouls even though they were explicitly told that this was not to be considered a long switch (because there was a change in possession). I think that we got our wrists slapped by IAABO International after a State tournament final observation by such. It's possible that some local, or state, boards, or associations (IAABO or other) consider this a "no long switch" situation.

Also keep in mind that the NFHS Rules Committee is considering eliminating the player control signal, using the team control signal instead.

As I've stated before, here in my little corner of Connecticut we see more player control foul signals than Carter has Little Liver Pills.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I see a strong, confident signal. She gives a good first impression to anybody watching her whether or not she used to precise signal that should have been used.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Indeed....and the NFHS has a change on its current proposals to use the TC signal she used for both TC and PC. And I like the idea as this signal is 10 times better than the "official" PC signal is. In fact, in Oregon, we officially authorize the use of this signal for PC fouls.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... NFHS has a change ... to use the TC signal ... for both TC and PC ... this signal is 10 times better than the "official" PC signal is. In fact, in Oregon, we officially authorize the use of this signal for PC fouls.

100% agree. We have guys here in Connecticut that have unilaterally done the same as you guys in the Great Northwest.

[JRutledge]

And what is ironic is that now for NCAA Men's, all signals for PC and TC foul are the "hand behind the head" signal. So NF might be going away from it but college Men's ran to that signal.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And what is ironic is that now for NCAA Men's, all signals for PC and TC foul are the "hand behind the head" signal.

Not a college guy, but from what I've read on the Forum (my only source of college stuff), I thought the same myself.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Not a college guy, but from what I've read on the Forum (my source of college stuff), I thought the same myself.

You do not have to be a college guy to know that Men's changed their mechanic. They had several confusing signals in the NCAA Tournament that seemed to prompt the change. Just interesting in this area the philosophies and why they do things differently or want to do things differently.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You do not have to be a college guy to know that Men's changed their mechanic.

I don't watch a lot of college (or professorial) basketball on television so everything I know about college officiating I learn from the Forum. If it wasn't for the Forum, I wouldn't know that the NCAA went to the "hand behind the head" signal for both player control and team control fouls.

Even though some of our local board guys officiate college games, our local board is strictly a high school board that only teaches and discusses high school rules and mechanics.

The only reason I give half a thought to college rules is to prepare for debates with confused high school coaches that watch a lot of Saturday afternoon college basketball on television, and a few partners who work a lot of college games and know college rules better than high school rules (also to work Connecticut private prep school games that use some college rules).

[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...V7Hpo0Ug%3D%3D

IAABO Play Commentary: Correct Answer: This is a player control foul.

White #14 cuts to the basket, receives the ball and starts a dribble, and contacts a secondary defender (Black #1) in the lane. Black #1 obtained legal guarding position (LGP) by having both feet touching the playing court the front of her torso facing the opponent. (4-23-2) The contact caused by White #14 displaces Black #1 and is properly ruled a foul by the Lead official. Because White #14 was in control of the ball when the foul occurred, this is a player control foul. (4-19-6)

The Lead official incorrectly demonstrates the team control foul signal at the site of the foul. The player control foul signal should have been displayed by placing a hand behind the head. (IAABO manual p. 239)

After ruling a foul, the ruling official should hustle to the reporting area. Stop. Complete all reporting information – verbalize uniform color, signal the player’s number, signal the type of foul. (IAABO manual p. 249)

It should be noted that when the team control signal is needed, it should not be demonstrated by using a "punching" motion. (IAABO manual p. 239) When signaling, be professional, by using signals in a manner which is calm, unhurried, and under control. (IAABO manual p. 233 Section C)

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: This is a player control foul 85% (including me). The defensive player "flopped" 12%. This is a blocking foul 3%.