Had a player one game think she was being smart by sneaking down around the 3 pt line during free throws to try for better position on the rebound. I had three delayed violations before I actually had to blow my whistle. This was sophomore girls, and I didn't feel it was my responsibility to coach her on the rules. She learned the rule quick, though, when I gave the shooter another shot.

In the second NCAA national semi-final this year, Connecticut had free throws in the double bonus up by 3 with about 3 seconds left. The shooter (Okafor) was very jacked up. After the ball was put at his disposal, he backed up and very very nearly left the semi-circle. The official was watching it closely. I was almost hoping he stepped out to see whether it would be called. I think it would have been, and then there would have been some serious prayer going on that he nailed the second.

Ah, but was the official counting towards 10? :D

I got three lines into this post, and I'm rummaging around in my memory for a free throw in the last three seconds, and thinking, what, what? .... when I finally got to the word, "Okafor". Oh-ho! I see. MEN'S NCAA semi-final, Connecticut. Just for future reference, there's one sport, basketball, with two groups of players. There's men's basketball, and women's basketball, or in hs there's girls' and boys'. It's not basketball, and women's basketball. It's not Connecticut, and Connecticut women. Okay, got it straight? Thank you, I feel better now.

PS this isn't personal at you, rulesmaven. You just happened to be standing there when my annoyance with the sportswriters and announcers and certain coaches, though not others, and not a few referees, sort of boiled over. Here, let me wipe the spew off of your cheek here, and shake my hand. I'm sure we can get past this.

Attaboy!

Right! Always best to stand up like a man and say what you're thinking.

Yup, that rainmaker showed some serious huevos.

Yes, I get it.

I suppose I thought the situation described would make it pretty clear which national semi-final game I was talking about. (And anyway the WCBB semi involving Connecticut, would have been the fourth national semi, not the second!)

Maybe I'm not understanding the point, but if I had put the word "Duke" in the first sentence, would you still have wanted to see "Men's" in there?

Well, Duke women didn't make it to the semi- this year, but they have done well in the past. My point is that there WERE both women and men from Connecticut. It's just another way to narrow down who you are talking about. When you never actually say who you mean, it gets confusing. When I read your post, I think basketball. But for me, there's " women's basketball" and "men's basketball." I think women's first, because that's what I do the most and what I'm the most interested in. But most people think the other way around, and figure that's normal. Even the newspaper puts in their listings, "NCAA basketball" or "NCAA Women's basketball." I'm objecting to that. It's all basketball. It's either men's or women's, not either "basketball" or "women's basketball." There aren't lawyers, and lady lawyers, just lawyers. Not doctors, and women doctors, just doctors. Get it?

I do get it.

I might argue that the more progressive approach is to not use either the designation "men's" or "women's" unless it's unclear from context.

Your assumption seems to be that if I'd been discussing the women's Connecticut semifinal instead of the men's that I would have put the word "women's" in there. I'm not so sure I would have if it was equally clear from context what game I was talking about. What if I would have simply said, "In the second national semi, there was an interesting issue when the Minnesota player appeared to be allowed to check in, notwithstanding Auriemma's objection, although no time had expired on the clock"? Aren't I then permitted not to use the designation "men's" when talking about the men's tournament?

After all, I don't say that I'm going to the "men's room" when I try to explain to my wife why I'm getting up from the table at a restaurant. I would just say, "I'm going to the restroom." But that hardly means that I think of the "restroom" as being the place for men and the "women's restroom" for being the place where women go. It just means that it's clear from context -- just as when I refer to a national semi that was put away with three second left at the line by Emeka Okafor, I assume people will know which of the national semis I'm talking about.

I understand that there are lots of people who think of "basketball" as what the men play and "women's basketball" as what the women play. I'd like to think I'm not one of those people, and genuinely don't think I am. With all due respect, I think my post was hardly good evidence that I am, but I'm certainly willing to keep my mind open to the possibility I might be.

With all due respect, if the name "Okafor" told you it was a men's game, then what's the big deal? :confused:

If he had written, "In the second NCAA national semi-final this year, Connecticut had free throws in the double bonus up by 3 with about 3 seconds left. The shooter (Taurasi) was very jacked up," should men be equally as upset as you? :confused:

The original situation falls under my "Big Deal" theory. Is that player's toe on the line 19'9" from the basket during a FT a big deal? If it is, then put a whistle on it. If not, you let it go and mention it when you get a chance.

It's exactly like the carry in the backcourt with no defensive pressure. Is that a big deal? If you feel it is, then call it. If not, you let it go and mention to the coach that his point guard is awfully close to a turnover. My personal opinion is that neither situation is a big deal.

Now if he carries the ball as he makes his move to the basket, that's a big deal. Whislte. Putting a toe OOB, that's a big deal.

It's a little different from advantage/disadvantage, but it works for me.

As somebody's tagline once said, "In theory, theory is the same as practice. But in practice, it isn't."

How about basketball that people watch, and basketball that people don't watch?

Sorry, sorry, Juulie. Just stirring the pot!! :D

Could be just me, but I don't understand the concept of choosing to make - or not make - the call based on whether the offending player is close to getting a rebound, primarily because of the mechanics involved. (I understand differing opinions on advantage / no advantage or big deal / not a big deal, but this situation has a mechanics twist.)

If you're going to call it, shouldn't you be making the signal for a delayed call? If so, you would have the signal when you notice the violation. This could be 2, 5, or 8 seconds before you actually blow the whistle.

If you're waiting to judge if the offending player is close to a rebound, then you must not be using the delayed signal. In that case, you would make no signal and then blow the whistle after you watch to see who is near the rebound. (You wouldn't signal for a delayed call and then, after seeing the offending player is not near the rebound, just put you're hand down as if nothing happened later, would you?)

I confess, I'm a rookie here, so the whole mechanics part of this issue may not be a big deal. However, I would think that using a delay signal and calling nothing or not using the delay signal and then calling something could alter the confidence level some coaches (or other officials) have in you. For example, how confident would you be if every time an official calls a foul he/she does so with an open hand? Wouldn't you wonder if this official was competent in other areas?

Good questions. I know my response aint the answer you're looking for, but here it is. And I'm NOT saying forget mechanics, because they are very very important along with rules knowledge. Having said that, let's try to answer it this way: at most levels - and especially at the level you're calling as a new guy - coaches and players don't care enough about mechanics to know if you're doing it by the book or not. They just care that the game gets called well (sometimes means in their favor, sometimes not) and that they eventually win. Your job, on the other hand, is to ensure the game is played within the spirit of the rules and that the better team that game wins. Focus on that and you won't have coaches questioning your ability.