Bounce the ball to player for throw in?

[Rickref]

In 3 person mechanics: When the is to be inbounded deep in the corner on the sideline which is the proper mechanic, the lead to bounce the ball up to the player or for the trail to come down and bounce it. I've seen and done both. I let the trail handle it.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Rickref
In 3 person mechanics: When the is to be inbounded deep in the corner on the sideline which is the proper mechanic, the lead to bounce the ball up to the player or for the trail to come down and bounce it. I've seen and done both. I let the trail handle it.

FED -- trail administers all side-line throw-ins.

[JRutledge]

Z,

Not sure how telling us what to do within the NF mechanic is "doing their own thing?" They had found that officials were cheating and going up the court, instead of staying in good position. So they said, "We will only hand the ball into the thrower from the end line." I guess I am not seeing the harm in that.

Every year in all the sports I work, someone has to come in and give a ruling or clarify a position because the NF did not make their position very clear. The NF only makes a ruling, they do not often explain in great detail why they change things or want us to do something in particular.

I will never understand you point that the NF is God and we only have to do what they say to the letter.

Peace

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by jeffpea
When you see someone bounce, do they back-up into a good position and THEN bounce/administer (which is what you should do), or do they bounce and then move (which is poor positioning - you shouldn't move after administering).

".

OK, I'm confused...in this post you said that it's poor positioning and you shouldn't move after administering the ball, but in your next post on this topic (if I knew how to include more than one quote, I would) you said to hand the ball to the thrower AND THEN MOVE BACK A FEW STEPS...so basically, when it comes to throw-ins on the endline in backcourt, you've just proven to us why it's a good idea to bounce the ball to the thrower, which I believe is allowed under NFHS mechanics...or am I reading your posts wrong?

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by rockyroad


OK, I'm confused...in this post you said that it's poor positioning and you shouldn't move after administering the ball, but in your next post on this topic (if I knew how to include more than one quote, I would) you said to hand the ball to the thrower AND THEN MOVE BACK A FEW STEPS...so basically, when it comes to throw-ins on the endline in backcourt, you've just proven to us why it's a good idea to bounce the ball to the thrower, which I believe is allowed under NFHS mechanics...or am I reading your posts wrong?

We are aware of what the NF mechanic is, but the powers that be do not agree with it how officials were using one part of that mechanic. So they took away one of the options. I happen to agree with the officials from the IHSA on this. We have been using that mechanic for 2 years now and I have been using it religiously myself with no problems. Remember the NF gave us the option, they did not say you had to do one thing or the other. If the IHSA told us to bounce the ball if we wanted to, I would not bounce the ball ever. I know the NF gives us the option of being inside the thrower (in the FC) or outside the thrower on the end line. I only hand the ball on the outside because I feel I am in better position to call the play. Does that make me personally not compliant with the NF because I have found something that works for me?

Peace

[zebraman]

Originally posted by JRutledge


Not sure how telling us what to do within the NF mechanic is "doing their own thing?" They had found that officials were cheating and going up the court, instead of staying in good position. So they said, "We will only hand the ball into the thrower from the end line." I guess I am not seeing the harm in that.


No big deal in the scheme of things, but why not just correct the officials who were cheating up the court. Correct the cheating official, not the mechanic which is very effective.


Every year in all the sports I work, someone has to come in and give a ruling or clarify a position because the NF did not make their position very clear.


Agreed, and that is called an interpretation. There is a big difference between interpreting a muddy rule and changing it outright.



I will never understand you point that the NF is God and we only have to do what they say to the letter.

You keep using that word "God." Just because I try to use standard NFHS mechanics and rules doesn't imply any worship (well, for you it does). I'll never understand why you worship at the feet of some college assignor who overrules the governing body for whom he works. There is a process in place to request a change in mechanics and rules through NFHS. To "ban" certain mechanics or change them on our own doesn't help anyone (except the ego of the person who anoints themself as Caeser).

Z

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by JRutledge

We are aware of what the NF mechanic is, but the powers that be do not agree with it how officials were using one part of that mechanic. So they took away one of the options. I happen to agree with the officials from the IHSA on this. We have been using that mechanic for 2 years now and I have been using it religiously myself with no problems. Remember the NF gave us the option, they did not say you had to do one thing or the other. If the IHSA told us to bounce the ball if we wanted to, I would not bounce the ball ever. I know the NF gives us the option of being inside the thrower (in the FC) or outside the thrower on the end line. I only hand the ball on the outside because I feel I am in better position to call the play. Does that make me personally not compliant with the NF because I have found something that works for me?

Peace

I could care less if you stood on your head and drop-kicked it to the thrower in Illinois...just didn't like the fact that jeffpea asserted that it was "bad" to do something, and then in the next post told us to do that "bad" thing... seemed kinda contradictory to me and I wanted a clarification of that point, not your justification for why you do one thing or the other...

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by zebraman
Originally posted by JRutledge



I will never understand you point that the NF is God and we only have to do what they say to the letter.

You keep using that word "God." Just because I try to use standard NFHS mechanics and rules doesn't imply any worship (well, for you it does). I'll never understand why you worship at the feet of some college assignor who overrules the governing body for whom he works. There is a process in place to request a change in mechanics and rules through NFHS. To "ban" certain mechanics or change them on our own doesn't help anyone (except the ego of the person who anoints themself as Caeser).

Z

The person to which Jeff is referring didn't "annoint himself Caeser". The IHSA has put him in charge of mechanics (among other things). IT's not one rogue "college assigner" trying to change things in his conference(s).

And, he doesn't work for the NFHS. The NFHS works for the states.


It's really no different from Kentucky (or whatever the original state was) forbidding any bounce passes.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman

No big deal in the scheme of things, but why not just correct the officials who were cheating up the court. Correct the cheating official, not the mechanic which is very effective.

Maybe because they did not want to take that stand? Maybe, just maybe?

Originally posted by zebraman
Agreed, and that is called an interpretation. There is a big difference between interpreting a muddy rule and changing it outright.

You are right, it is called and interpretation. But there have been many state interpretations that either the NF adopted (from this state) or changed their own interpretation because of concerns that have come directly from this state. I know in football the NF took on the logic as in football the NF put out several contradictory interpretations as it relates to the PSK rule. Our state interpreters told us to do it one way, the NF soon followed after they screwed the pooch. I do not consider that muddying the waters, I consider that common sense.

Originally posted by zebraman

You keep using that word "God." Just because I try to use standard NFHS mechanics and rules doesn't imply any worship (well, for you it does).

I use the word God, because just like a Christian or a Muslim that keeps referencing the words of the Bible or the Koran without any consideration for context or personal faith or denomination that someone might practice. I know when the Pope speaks about issues of God; I know I do not take in account his teachings as to how the Word of God is to be interpreted. It might be interesting to make note of, but not being a Catholic the Pope is just another human being. I am sure the Catholics feel the same way as to someone speaking outside of their religious faith and practices.

Originally posted by zebraman
I'll never understand why you worship at the feet of some college assignor who overrules the governing body for whom he works.

The governing body that we work for is the IHSA, not the NF.

I work about 95% of my games at the HS level. I work college but that does not carry over to my HS game philosophy. I am not talking about a college interpretation; I am telling you what a mechanic that was subscribed by our state interpreters and clinician that happens to be a former D1 Official. You are the one that claimed that the NF knows better than all involved. And by the way, the NF Basketball editor is a D1 Officials but on the women's side. It is very clear that some of the changes over the past few years are in direct compliance with the NCAA Women's philosophy and do not be surprised if more changes will follow. Not everyone is happy with those philosophies, but they are filtering back to the HS level.

Originally posted by zebraman
There is a process in place to request a change in mechanics and rules through NFHS. To "ban" certain mechanics or change them on our own doesn't help anyone (except the ego of the person who anoints themself as Caeser).

I think Bob said this best. The NF works for the states. Unfortunately most people cannot call the NF directly for an interpretation or direction on situations that cause confusion or debate. I also know that many of the things that have been adopted as mechanics or philosophies have filter there way into the actual NF Rule and Mechanic books. Mary Struckoff was once the head person over the IHSA Officials Department. It has been suggested that she still has contact with the IHSA closely and has spoken a few times since she has left at IHSA functions. I realize you might think there is something wrong with coming up with a solution to a common problem, and that is your right to feel that way. I just think it is silly to think that the NF has all power and only their interpretations are solid. I guess out state should not throw out test questions that the NF writes because they are all knowing and powerful. Not that anyone from our state would be smart enough to know that there is confusion in many of their test questions or interpretations the NF can and has come up with. I guess we should all be like the people in the book 1984 and just follow blindly without dissention from “Big Brother.”

Peace

[zebraman]

Rut,

You lost me once you got into your religious dissertation. I thought we were talking basketball and somehow the Pope is now posting up in the lane.


Z

[zebraman]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

And, he doesn't work for the NFHS. The NFHS works for the states.

Now you're just being silly - that's just semantics. My management actually "works for me", but it's the company policies that I am supposed to follow. Like I have said before, there is a process in place to get mechanics and rules changed through NFHS. The NFHS will assist in answering rules questions from state associations whenever called upon. If the interpreter has gone through those processes and got a change approved, great. Otherwise, it's just "I know better" behavior.

Z

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman
Rut,

You lost me once you got into your religious dissertation. I thought we were talking basketball and somehow the Pope is now posting up in the lane.


Z

We are talking basketball. I just do not worship the NF like you do. States in my opinion have every right to come up with practices, philosophies and mechanics that they choose to. If the NF does not like that, then I guess they have some recourse, but I am not sure what that would be.

The NF is just an organization with human beings, they cannot control everything.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by zebraman
Now you're just being silly - that's just semantics. My management actually "works for me", but it's the company policies that I am supposed to follow. Like I have said before, there is a process in place to get mechanics and rules changed through NFHS. The NFHS will assist in answering rules questions from state associations whenever called upon. If the interpreter has gone through those processes and got a change approved, great. Otherwise, it's just "I know better" behavior.

Z

I think you need to explain why the NF is God? Why do you have to ask other states if they want to make a very minor change? Are we going to be on punishment if we do not?

Peace