kudos for a coach and a question for the 3 person folks

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by blindzebra
Ball on end line going the other way with 1 second left, trail is opposite the table. Screening action on center's side of the court in the backcourt.

Long pass to the 3 point line in the frontcourt, how is the trail or center going to get a look at that shot?

What makes you think that trail or the center official cannot ever see that type of play? But if they cannot see the play, the lead should not be signaling anything. If the Trial or Center does not see the play, then the Lead can help but not signal anything. It is there call unless they decide to give up that responsibility. I still feel that the calling person (to the table) should be the opposite official that makes the call. Even if it is a couple seconds after the horn the officials can come together and help each other on this call. It looks a lot worse if the lead assumes that the Center or Trail does not have a look at the play and signals one thing and the calling official signals something else. I do not know about you but I can run and hustle. It is not out of the question that I can see the shot from those positions.

Peace

[FrankHtown]

Another variable is if the gym only has one clock, mounted on a wall behind the basket. In some cases the lead may be the only one with a clear view of the clock, if the play is going away from that wall.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by JRutledge
I never have seen a point to make the lead the person that has the last second shot.

That is the accepted mechanic in two-person, and I think it carries well to three-person.

It's also why NCAAW make the C responsible -- the C will never be "too far" from the play (in theory), and the C will remain responsible if theres a turnover (instead of the T and L taking turns being responsible -- if the y are opposite the table).

I seem to recall reading that it's also the NBA mechanic? Pre-defined that it goes to L on a throw with less than 3-seconds left (or something like that).

And, I agree with whoever said that the "best" mechanic (imho) is to give it to primary.

[zebraman]

Originally posted by Dewey1
I agree with everyone that the mechanic on a last second shot in 3 person is give it to "opposite". What I don't understand is why every shot clock situation the mechanic is "primary"? I don't see what the difference is, in both cases you are judging if the shot was out of the shooters hand before the horn. If primary is good enough for 39.59.9 minutes why change the mechanic on end of a period/half or game? Just seems funny and strange to me.

Around here, we have T or C (whoever is opposite of table) take both the shot clock and last second game clock. Easy to remember, plus you don't have to worry about lockdown since a rotation doesn't change the person who has clock responsibility.

Z

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

That is the accepted mechanic in two-person, and I think it carries well to three-person.

I guess my question would be acceptable to whom? I hear a lot of people talk about different things as to who has the last second shot and I do not hear many people that I respect advocating having the lead making this call on their own.

Originally posted by bob jenkins
It's also why NCAAW make the C responsible -- the C will never be "too far" from the play (in theory), and the C will remain responsible if theres a turnover (instead of the T and L taking turns being responsible -- if the y are opposite the table).

I seem to recall reading that it's also the NBA mechanic? Pre-defined that it goes to L on a throw with less than 3-seconds left (or something like that).

And, I agree with whoever said that the "best" mechanic (imho) is to give it to primary.

The last second shot is everyone's responsibility first of all. What I am saying is that only one person should be signaling is the Trail or the Center. Signaling and seeing are two different things. I think there is too much risk in saying, "In transition we will do this." Well every time there is a transition does not make the Center or Trail official totally screened or in a bad position to see the call. The Center or Trail might be in a better position than the Lead to see the entire play. I think you should let the calling official make the final decision and have the other officials help in that decision.

Peace

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by JRutledge

I guess my question would be acceptable to whom? I hear a lot of people talk about different things as to who has the last second shot and I do not hear many people that I respect advocating having the lead making this call on their own.

The last second shot is everyone's responsibility first of all. What I am saying is that only one person should be signaling is the Trail or the Center. Signaling and seeing are two different things. I think there is too much risk in saying, "In transition we will do this." Well every time there is a transition does not make the Center or Trail official totally screened or in a bad position to see the call. The Center or Trail might be in a better position than the Lead to see the entire play. I think you should let the calling official make the final decision and have the other officials help in that decision.

Peace

The vast majority of officials don't have a monitor to go to, the official with the best look and KNOWS, it is an attempt or late, SHOULD be signaling IMMEDIATELY.

Nothing looks worse than a huddle in this situation.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by blindzebra
The vast majority of officials don't have a monitor to go to, the official with the best look and KNOWS, it is an attempt or late, SHOULD be signaling IMMEDIATELY.

Nothing looks worse than a huddle in this situation.

I am not talking about having a huddle. You can confer with your partner without a huddle. But you will have to huddle if one official says it counts and another official says it is no good. Not sure that that looks very good either. And if you tell me that "in transition we are going to do this," what happens if the Trail or Center sees the play clearly and the Lead assumes they did not. You tell me.

Peace

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by JRutledge

I am not talking about having a huddle. You can confer with your partner without a huddle. But you will have to huddle if one official says it counts and another official says it is no good. Not sure that that looks very good either. And if you tell me that "in transition we are going to do this," what happens if the Trail or Center sees the play clearly and the Lead assumes they did not. You tell me.

Peace

I already gave you a play where only lead could have a good look at the attempt.

Remove the C and make it two whistle and it is even more LIKELY that only lead can see that play.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by blindzebra

I already gave you a play where only lead could have a good look at the attempt.

Remove the C and make it two whistle and it is even more LIKELY that only lead can see that play.

With all due respect I really am not talking about 2 person. I hardly work 2 person games. Even in 2 person I have not come in contact with a situation that I could not see the shot. Usually if there are only seconds, it is not like the shooter is all the way on the other end of the court and right in front of the Lead. Usually the shooter is more at half court and both officials can see the shot.

Peace

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by JRutledge

With all due respect I really am not talking about 2 person. I hardly work 2 person games. Even in 2 person I have not come in contact with a situation that I could not see the shot. Usually if there are only seconds, it is not like the shooter is all the way on the other end of the court and right in front of the Lead. Usually the shooter is more at half court and both officials can see the shot.

Peace

I'll repeat the play I posted before.

Trail is opposite the table.

1 second left.

Throw in from the endline in the back court.

Screening action infront of C also in the back court.

Long pass to inside the 3 pt line in the front court opposite the table.

Catch and shot.

Let's break this down.

By the manual this try is trail's call, trail who is 65 feet away with no angle to see hands and ball.

Center is pinned at the division line, so they are 30 feet or so away with a slightly better angle.

Lead is right on top of it, stationary, with the play coming at him, and with an unobstructed view of the hands and ball.

This is obvious in 3 whistle and a no-brainer in 2.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by blindzebra


I'll repeat the play I posted before.

Trail is opposite the table.

1 second left.

Throw in from the endline in the back court.

Screening action infront of C also in the back court.

Long pass to inside the 3 pt line in the front court opposite the table.

Catch and shot.

Let's break this down.

By the manual this try is trail's call, trail who is 65 feet away with no angle to see hands and ball.

Center is pinned at the division line, so they are 30 feet or so away with a slightly better angle.

Lead is right on top of it, stationary, with the play coming at him, and with an unobstructed view of the hands and ball.

This is a obvious in 3 whistle and a no-brainer in 2.

What makes you think the Trail cannot see that? Because it is on the other end of the court, he cannot see the shot? What if the Lead sees one thing and the Trail with another angle sees something else? Now what? At the very least the officials better make some kind of eye contact before there is a signal. All I am saying that there better be a pause before a final decision is made. You do not have to agree, but I think it is better to do that than have any confusion as to who has the call. I have yet to see this perfect pass that goes the length of the court and there is a shot. Sorry if I am skeptical with your point of view on this.

Peace

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by JRutledge

What makes you think the Trail cannot see that? Because it is on the other end of the court, he cannot see the shot? What if the Lead sees one thing and the Trail with another angle sees something else? Now what? At the very least the officials better make some kind of eye contact before there is a signal. All I am saying that there better be a pause before a final decision is made. You do not have to agree, but I think it is better to do that than have any confusion as to who has the call. I have yet to see this perfect pass that goes the length of the court and there is a shot. Sorry if I am skeptical with your point of view on this.

Peace

It is OBVIOUS which official in a situation like that will have the best look and get the call correct, and it is NOT the one 65 feet away that cannot see the hands and ball.

I guess you missed one of the best NCAA games ever, but I'll bet EVERY Kentucky fan will disagree about never seeing a perfect full court pass for a last second shot.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by blindzebra


It is OBVIOUS which official in a situation like that will have the best look and get the call correct, and it is NOT the one 65 feet away that cannot see the hands and ball.

I guess you missed one of the best NCAA games ever, but I'll bet EVERY Kentucky fan will disagree about never seeing a perfect full court pass for a last second shot.

Well actually, if I recall there was a camera angle that was from the baseline. It was clear as day from the baseline that the whether he got the shot off in time. If anything the Lead official in this case had several players around the basket. The only two players in the back court were Grant Hill and player near half court from what I remember. I saw the game live when it happen, I have seen the replay hundreds of times by now. I saw nothing that suggested that the Trail or Center could not see the shot. If anyone had more of an obstructed view, it was the Lead Official. Actually that very example is the reason I hold the philosophy that I do. No one has to be standing right in front of a play to see the play.

Peace

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by JRutledge

Well actually, if I recall there was a camera angle that was from the baseline. It was clear as day from the baseline that the whether he got the shot off in time. If anything the Lead official in this case had several players around the basket. The only two players in the back court were Grant Hill and player near half court from what I remember. I saw the game live when it happen, I have seen the replay hundreds of times by now. I saw nothing that suggested that the Trail or Center could not see the shot. If anyone had more of an obstructed view, it was the Lead Official. Actually that very example is the reason I hold the philosophy that I do. No one has to be standing right in front of a play to see the play.

Peace

Where did I say that the Duke/Kentucky play was the same?

I put out a specific situation where lead would ABSOLUTELY have the best look, and you came back with, " I've NEVER seen a perfect long pass play."

You have yet to address the fact that there will be situations where lead WILL have the best look, and your overstatement about full court pass plays completey blew up in your face.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by blindzebra


Where did I say that the Duke/Kentucky play was the same?

I put out a specific situation where lead would ABSOLUTELY have the best look, and you came back with, " I've NEVER seen a perfect long pass play."

You have yet to address the fact that there will be situations where lead WILL have the best look, and your overstatement about full court pass plays completey blew up in your face.

You are right. You did not talk specifically about the Duke/Kentucky game.

But the "never" I am referring to is in games I have worked in. The other situations that I have seen on TV, it still is not a common occurrence. I do not officiate for the unusual or once in a career type plays. The reason Christian Lathaner (sp?) play is so amazing is because you do not see that every day. You do not see it every few seasons. I have seen many buzzer beaters and there they are a result of a dribble and shoot.

I am not going to admit that the Lead has the best look, because I do not agree with that point of view. I can only speak for me. I hustle and run. I rarely just stand in one place, especially in a situation when I expect a quick drive or run from one end of the court.

If you feel that is the best way to handle the situation, do so. I do not have to work with you. I do not have to convince you one way or the other during a pregame what we are going to do. I have heard people change the responsibility based on who can see the clock. Just because it works for one person does not mean it works for everyone else. I would rather let the Center or Trail (again I rarely work 2 man games, sorry) make the decision. If they do not have the angle, they can ask for help. There is nothing wrong with getting help. I just do not want there to be two separate officials signaling and seeing two different things. Then having to communicate and decide which is right and which was wrong. I will get over how it looks if they confer with each other to get that play right.

Peace