Fun With A Pass And Crash …

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I understand the rationale, and recall a Forum thread about that, with some videos.

So why did the NFHS ignore those NCAA/CCA reasons for the change and go down the road not taken, exploring the possibility of just using the punch signal, and eliminating the NCAA/CCA favored hand behind the head signal, against all rational thought?

Of course, I'm jumping the gun here, we'll have to wait a few weeks to see what the NFHS decides to do, if anything, with these PC/TC signals.

NCAA-Women's does not use the same signals for offensive fouls that NCAA-Men's do, so it's not as simple as copying what the NCAA does. Each organization does what they feel like doing.

[BillyMac]

... One of these things just doesn't belong, Can you tell which thing is not like the others, By the time I finish my song?

Originally Posted by Raymond

NCAA-Women's does not use the same signals for offensive fouls that NCAA-Men's do, so it's not as simple as copying what the NCAA does. Each organization does what they feel like doing.

So it's possible that the NCAAM will be the odd man out.

Interesting.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... One of these things just doesn't belong, Can you tell which thing is not like the others, By the time I finish my song?



So it's possible that the NCAAM will be the odd man out.

Interesting.

Each committee does not give a crap what the other one does. They worry about their game and their game only for the most part. As should be expected. That is why women has quarters and men have halves. They have different concerns.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Each committee does not give a crap what the other one does. They worry about their game and their game only for the most part.

JRutledge is in a much better position than me to understand the complexities of NCAA men's and women's differentiated rules and mechanics.

But I would think that they are, at least, aware of what the other is doing and, for reasons benefiting each, choosing either do the same, or not to do the same.

It is often opined on the Forum that NCAA rules often trickle down to the NFHS. When one looks at all three groups, NFHS, NCAAM, and NCAAW, there might be tiny little bit of "cross pollination" going on.

There's probably more in common between NFHS basketball, NCAAM basketball, and NCAAW basketball, than there are differences between them.

If a being from Jupiter were to land here and watch all three games for the very first time, it would take him a very long time to note subtle differences, certainly longer than it would take him to note that the line at the women's restroom is much longer than the line at the men's rest room, and that concession stand beer is more expensive than beer purchased at a store.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge is in a much better position than me to understand the complexities of NCAA men's and women's differentiated rules and mechanics.

But I would think that they are, at least, aware of what the other is doing and, for reasons benefiting each, choosing either do the same, or not to do the same.

It is often opined on the Forum that NCAA rules often trickle down to the NFHS. When one looks at all three groups, NFHS, NCAAM, and NCAAW, there might be tiny little bit of "cross pollination" going on.

There's probably more in common between NFHS basketball, NCAAM basketball, and NCAAW basketball, than there are differences between them.

The Men's level trickles down to the high school level more often IMO. Women's basketball is often trying to align with the NBA which has their own ideas of things. That is why they went to quarters for the most part and many of their coverage areas are similar to the NBA.

Peace

[ilyazhito]

I'm curious why women's basketball is trying to copy the NBA. Is it because the mechanics and/or coverage ideas that the NBA uses are better for the women's game, or is it because the officiating movers and shakers have an NBA background (looking at you, Violet Palmer) and are trying to re-create something familiar?

Anyway, when I saw the video on RefQuest, I answered team control foul, because the player no longer had possession when he crashed into a legally positioned defender. I was surprised that the Lead did not call that, because he seemed to be in good position based on the video.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

...

Anyway, when I saw the video on RefQuest, I answered team control foul, because the player no longer had possession when he crashed into a legally positioned defender. I was surprised that the Lead did not call that, because he seemed to be in good position based on the video.

He may have felt it wasn't worth a whistle. Or it may have caught him by surprise. I wish he would have rotated, that way we would know for sure that he saw the play completely and his lack of a whistle would be based on his judgment, and not the possibility he didn't see the play clearly.