pet peeve - Last second shot - NCAA Men's mechanic

Dewey1 · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 01:11am

I have a question. Why is NCAA men's mechanic in 3 person to have the offical opposite the table make the decision on a last second shot at the end of the half or game, yet for the rest of the entire game all shot clock violation are called by the primary offical? It seems funny to me that for 59.59 sec's primary is able to handle all shot clock violation yet at the end of the game we which to opposite.

This is not a real big deal just a pet peeve. I think it makes 2 people watch the ball if the shot is out of my primary and I am opposite. It really reduces the off ball officating. I am curious to anyone else opinion.

JRutledge · #2 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 02:37am

I will guess. But I am sure they do not want to have the possibility for two different officials having two different calls. That is too important of a time to have conflicting situations. So I am sure that is the main reason. The same issue with NCAA Women's mechanics, it is always the C that makes the call, but it is not handled like a shot clock violation either.

Peace

Dewey1 · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 11:22am

Rut I agree it is so we don't have 2 people making different signals. My question is why switch from primary to opposite. Why not just stay primary like we have for the rest of the game. That way you only have 1 person calling and only one person watching the ball.

It is just a pet peeve and I was wondering if anyone knew the rational for of why.

Mark Dexter · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 12:12pm

In 3-man, there are enough "gray areas" where it's not 100% as to whose primary it is. The doomsday scenario would be to have a shot at the top of the key with C signaling a missed three and T signalling a good 2.

Dewey1 · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 01:11pm

Mark that makes sense to me. I guess the part that doesn't is why we don't do that for all shot clock violations during the game. We could have the exact situtation you are talking about happen then but no one seems that worried about it.

JRutledge · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 02:07pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Dewey1
Mark that makes sense to me. I guess the part that doesn't is why we don't do that for all shot clock violations during the game. We could have the exact situtation you are talking about happen then but no one seems that worried about it.

Shot clock violations have other factors involved. The last second shot only is about whether it was released in time. You can have a shot clock violation if the ball does not hit the rim in time. Different situations. Not sure why this is a pet peeve of yours in the first place? All situations are not the same.

Peace

Dewey1 · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 02:43pm

I agree that they are not completly the same. But not that different in where the shot is out of the shooters hand in time. To me it just seems wierd that I can tell from primary if a shot is off in time on shot clock violations for 59 min and 59 sec's but at the end of the game we have to go opposite.
Thanks for input though. I was just interested in other people feelings and opinions. If it doesn't bother you or anyone else then that is good. I guess I like to see logic in changing things and I just don't really see the need to switch out of primary. Maybe it is just me and we can let this thread die. Thanks again for the opinions. It is always helpful to hear others thoughts.

Brad · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 04:30pm

This is one that the women do correctly -- let the center have the last second shot.

It makes the most sense, especially on plays that go the length of the court in the last couple of seconds.

"Opposite" just doesn't make sense anymore -- maybe in the day that the clock was only above the scorer's table, but not now with multiple clocks, red lights on backboard, etc.

JRutledge · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 05:16pm

Brad,

But that still would be an issue for Dewey1, at least based on his argument. The C does not take all the shot clock violations, the primary officials has the call just like the Men's side. The only difference in the last second shot is who has it between the two sides, not where they are located. I like the Men's mechanic (NF as well) because the person is not right in front of the table, they are across the table and can signal with less obstruction in my opinion. It is not about where the clock is located, it is who has the best look at the play and who can signal the shot counting or not counting. That to me is the official across from the table.

Peace

Brad · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 05:21pm

What about the case where you have two seconds left on the court and the team that is down by one has to go the length of the court and score...

Let's say that trail is opposite the table -- that is, he is inbounding the ball on the baseline. I don't think that there is any way that he has a better look at the play versus the center, who would be somewhere around mid-court / 28-foot line.

And isn't the best look determined by where they shoot the last second shot from? We don't really have much control over that... I'm not sure I understand why being tableside or opposite matters if everyone is in the frontcourt.

JRutledge · #11 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 19, 2004, 05:33pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Brad
What about the case where you have two seconds left on the court and the team that is down by one has to go the length of the court and score...

Let's say that trail is opposite the table -- that is, he is inbounding the ball on the baseline. I don't think that there is any way that he has a better look at the play versus the center, who would be somewhere around mid-court / 28-foot line.

And isn't the best look determined by where they shoot the last second shot from? We don't really have much control over that... I'm not sure I understand why being tableside or opposite matters if everyone is in the frontcourt.

I disagree that the Center automatically has a good look at this play. If they defense is putting pressure on the ball, the Center might be looking thru bodies to make that shot. So the Center is not automatically in a better position to determine if the shot got off. And if you ask me, the Trail has sometimes a better look, because they are not "too close" to the play, they can see the release from many times a better angle. And in either case, I always say in the pregame, if you do not have a good look at the call, ask for help. But let the calling official make the signal. But I can see more problems with the Center in the half court making a call than I can see the Trail in the same situation. So I think it really does not matter and comes down to what you like.

Peace

Mark Dexter · #12 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 21, 2004, 05:44pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Brad
This is one that the women do correctly -- let the center have the last second shot.

It makes the most sense, especially on plays that go the length of the court in the last couple of seconds.

"Opposite" just doesn't make sense anymore -- maybe in the day that the clock was only above the scorer's table, but not now with multiple clocks, red lights on backboard, etc.

YEs - but don't forget that women don't rotate at the end of a half, and therefore whoever is C is going to remain C for the last few seconds.

Dewey1 · #13 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 21, 2004, 06:22pm

Rut I agree that the person opposite the table most likely is the one with the least amount of obstruction in front of them to signal a good hoop or wave it off. But I do not agree that the opposite offical has the best look.

If you are T opposite and the A1 takes a 3 point shot foul line extended across the court you are at least 30 feet or more away and I as C am probably less than 5.

The issue to me is not how can signal the hoop without traffic around them but rather who has the best look at whether the shot got off or not.

Call me crazy but it seems to reason that if for every shot clock violation we have primary as the best judge that would not need to change at the end of the half or game.

JRutledge · #14 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 21, 2004, 08:01pm

Dewey1,

We all have preferences. That is why there is a Men's side and there is a Women's side. Usually you cannot do both. So if you like the Women's mechanics, do Women's games. Personally that is not an issue I really care that much about. But I do think the Men's mechanics are much more reasonable and are better way to call the game. The Men's are more inline with the NF Mechanics as well. The Women Mechanics spend too much time trying to be like the NBA. Dewey1, we all have a right to like something over something else. But at the end of the day, who cares what we think individually on this. It is not going to change because we do not like what the NCAA has decided for the mechanics (or CCA). I think going tableside after a foul is rather stupid. But that is what they changed to.

And the CCA books do not do what you suggest anyway. There is no "shot clock violation" logic behind any last second shot situation on either level. So this is really a empty discussion as to how the situation should be handled. The Women only give one official that responsibility and it does not change even if the ball is on the other side of the court and right in front of the L. The C is still the one with the call. No different than the Men's side. Only difference, they do not have to be opposite the table.

Peace