Strange Case Continued ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Referee Magazine does not discuss officiating from only Wisconsin when they publish their materials.

Made my point. Thanks.

Because Referee Magazine has a wide audience, as does the Forum.

It can't publish articles about hundreds of areas with their own local rules or mechanics.

Who cares that in East Oshkosh, Wisconsin officials bounce the ball across the lane on frontcourt throwins (except for officials in East Oshkosh, Wisconsin)?

Only working one sport, I don't read Referee Magazine, but I would guess that it speaks NFHS language for high school rules.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Referee Magazine does not discuss officiating from only Wisconsin when they publish their materials.

Nor should anyone discuss local-only officiating here on the Forum without describing it as local-only.

Wait. "Nor should" is too strong. Sorry.

Discussing local-only officiating here on the Forum without describing it as local-only could lead to confusion, and hinder anything to be learned or accomplished.

Of course the big difference is that Referee Magazine will lose money if it only caters to a limited audience, the Forum won't.

Was never sure how the Forum makes money. No advertising. Who pays the electric bill? A billionaire benefactor?

Note: I made up the East Oshkosh, Wisconsin mechanic.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Because Referee Magazine has a wide audience, as does the Forum.

Only working one sport, I don't read Referee Magazine, but I would guess that it speaks NFHS language for high school rules.

Made my point. Thanks.

Nor should anyone discuss local-only officiating here on the Forum without describing it as local-only.

Wait. "Nor should" is too strong.

Discussing local-only officiating here on the Forum without describing it as local-only could lead to confusion, and hinder anything to be learned or accomplished.

Of course the big difference is that Referee Magazine will lose money if it caters to a limited audience, the Forum won't.

Was never sure how the Forum makes money. No advertising. Who pays the electric bill? A billionaire benefactor?

Again this shows this is your issue. There are people that can, do, and will ask questions if they are confused about something in multiple forums and social media places. They do in other national forums or places where officials do not only come from one place. And this forum is not what it used to be, so if you do not read Referee Magazine and you are not on Facebook or YouTube where all kinds of officiating rules and mechanics are discussed. I do not see anyone that confused by this and I have been in many officiating discussions on such places that are not my own.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

They do in other national forums or places where officials do not only come from one place ... Referee Magazine ... Facebook ... where all kinds of officiating rules and mechanics are discussed.

JRutledge is 100% correct. I do not participate in such.

IAABO does a great job presenting us with educational materials (the sole reason for its existence).

I have found the Official Forum to also be a great source of basketball officiating education.

Recently, I've been participating in Greg Austin's great live (and recorded) You Tube presentations. Shout out to Zoochy and Mike Goodwin.

Greg Austin's You Tube presentations speak to a very wide audience, so he always speaks NFHS, and will clarify if something is only statewide, or local (i.e., restrictive arc in Minnesota).

Probably doing more basketball rules study than 95-plus-% of my local colleagues. Probably why I'm one of the "go to" guys when someone has a rules question, and why I'm on the mechanics training committee.

That's enough for me. For me, basketball officiating is an avocation, not a vocation. Hard to believe, but I do have other interests.

Now I have to go out to my chicken coop and collect eggs, after that, the gym for forty minutes. Got a kayak race in a few weeks.

And I haven't read my Sunday newspaper yet. How bad did UCONN lose yesterday against Purdue?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Glad you added the qualifier "pretty", because not here. Had a guy wear a belt in a state final only a few years ago.

There is always an official that is going to look silly. Heck there are officials that wear white-soled shoes with mostly black shoes, but that does not mean I see that on a regular basis. Didn't say it was absolutely forbidden at all costs. Just not something people look fondly on. I have seen officials wear belts at the State Finals here, but the guys are rather old and workding small girl's basketball. Not a dig, just the only time I have seen it happen.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Statewide, we point to floor for a two point field goal try when the shooter has a foot touching three point line. If I were to describe this mechanic on the Forum, I would clearly state that it may be only a local (state) mechanic, never expecting anybody else to use it, or ask anybody else to approve of it.

That is a pretty universal thing at both the college and high school ranks. It is advocated to help any confusion and identify you saw the foot on the line and not have another official go up with a good 3 point shot. It would not consider this a state mechanic or even local thing. See officials do this all the time and not even sure this is mentioned in the CCA Book either. So not special to your little corner.

Peac

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is always an official that is going to look silly. Heck there are officials that wear white-soled shoes with mostly black shoes, but that does not mean I see that on a regular basis. Didn't say it was absolutely forbidden at all costs. Just not something people look fondly on. I have seen officials wear belts at the State Finals here, but the guys are rather old and workding small girl's basketball. Not a dig, just the only time I have seen it happen.







That is a pretty universal thing at both the college and high school ranks. It is advocated to help any confusion and identify you saw the foot on the line and not have another official go up with a good 3 point shot. It would not consider this a state mechanic or even local thing. See officials do this all the time and not even sure this is mentioned in the CCA Book either. So not special to your little corner.



Peac

Billy thinks you're not allowed to use any type of nonverbal communication that is not documented in a manual somewhere.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is always an official that is going to look silly. Didn't say it was absolutely forbidden at all costs. Just not something people look fondly on. I have seen officials wear belts at the State Finals here, but the guys are rather old and working small girl's basketball.

Agree. Did you watch the game? For my guy, he was a grizzled veteran, girls only, and retired right after he worked the final. When I train young'uns I tell them to do as I say, not as I do. Only wear beltless pants. It's a good look for a young guy, even better for a young gal.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That is a pretty universal thing at both the college and high school ranks. It is advocated to help any confusion and identify you saw the foot on the line and not have another official go up with a good 3 point shot.

Please tell that to my "bosses" at IAABO International. When the Grand Poobahs show up for our state finals , we get "dinged" every year.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Billy thinks you're not allowed to use any type of nonverbal communication that is not documented in a manual somewhere.

It is if you are observed by by IAABO International observers. We've been "dinged" in evaluations several times.

Stupid out-of-state carpetbaggers.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Because one may see it in their game and want to adjudicate correctly?

10.6.1 Situation E: B1 attempts to steal the ball from stationary A1 who is holding the ball. B1 misses the ball and falls to the floor. In dribbling away, A1 contacts B1's leg, loses control of the ball and falls to the floor. Ruling: No infraction or foul has occurred and play continues. Unless B1 made an effort to trip or block A1, he/she is entitled to a position on the court even if it is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down

Vanished from casebook in 2005-06, it goes back to at least 1996-97 (the oldest NFHS Rulebook in my library), so it was a NFHS interpretation for, at least, nine years, not a one hit wonder.

There were no relevant rule changes, or interpretation changes, in 2005-06, so why did it disappear?

NFHS decided to change the interpretation to a foul, but with no announcement?

Deleted due to limited space in the casebook?

Editorial mistake?



4-23-1: Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent ... Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.

The rule hasn't changed. The language in the vanished caseplay still matches the rule language: Unless B1 made some effort (extending arm, leg, rolling, etc.) to trip or block A1, B1 is entitled to a position on the court even if B1 is momentarily lying on the floor after falling down.

But we can't show a coach, or a young'un official, the casebook citation? Abracadabra. It vanished.

But we can show a 4-23-1 rule citation. Is that enough to rule a legal play?

If so, why did the NFHS bother to have made it a casebook play in the first place? Somebody must have had a question about it?

Could the NFHS have decided to change this interpretation to a foul?

I have a ton of curiosity. The suspense is killing me. Plus, the next time this happens in my game, I want to get it right.

Maybe I''ll get some answers in a few weeks?

Just have to keep my head on straight and not spend too much time in the open bar hospitality room.

It would be so funny if the answer came back as "who knows and who cares? What is your question about interpreting the current rule and relevant case plays?"



Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It is if you are observed by by IAABO International observers. We've been "dinged" in evaluations several times.

Stupid out-of-state carpetbaggers.

Do they pull you out of the game at halftime and replace you with a belted, veteran referee?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It would be so funny if the answer came back as "who knows and who cares? What is your question about interpreting the current rule and relevant case plays?"

Current rule says legal play. Rule hasn't changed since before, and after, 2005-06.

No more caseplay. Vanished into thin air.

Even though I'll probably risk falling into another debate black hole, what says Raymond?

Note: I have a feeling that the college rule may be different (or the same depending on what interpretation one believes) than the high school rule.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Do they pull you out of the game at halftime and replace you with a belted, veteran referee?

No. Worse. Even worse than double secret probation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

"who knows and who cares?"

Sounds like someone who spent way too much time in the open bar hospitality room.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... out of the game at halftime and replace you with a belted, veteran referee?

That's me, the belted, grizzled veteran. It would be my first state final, in fact, it would be my first state tournament game. Good reason for me to keep my bag in the car when I observe my "mates" working state tournament games (been hanging around with my Australian son-in-law too much).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It is if you are observed by by IAABO International observers. We've been "dinged" in evaluations several times.

Many years ago we were "dinged" by the IAABO out-of-state carpetbagging Grand Poobahs because we used a not-IAABO approved "not closely guarded" signal. Being the obedient, brown-nosing sheep that the Connecticut IAABO state board was back then, the entire State of Connecticut stopped using the signal. A few years later, IAABO added the same signal to their approved signal list.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

For my guy, he was a grizzled veteran, girls only, and retired right after he worked the final.

Retired to South Carolina. He's still officiating. Not basketball. Barbeque contests. It's true. He's a fully trained and certified barbeque judge. Never heard of such a thing here in Connecticut.