Spread arms signal for no closely guarded? Yes or no?

[Smitty]

Originally posted by Ref Daddy

Wheels turning - good discussion.

PROS - Streching out arm's is proactive. A signal to player, crowd and coach your on the play but distance scope not met...yet.

CONS - Stretched arms is not a NFHS mechanic and gets off balance with partner.

Shaking the head "no" concerns me. Isn't that reacting to the coach?

Absolutely it's reacting to the coach. I only do that when he is thinking a call should have been made and the play has not stopped so I have to focus on the game and can't look at him to either say "I hear you" or explain why I thought it was a no-call. It's a way of letting the coach know I heard what he said but did not consider it a violation/foul.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by Ref Daddy

Wheels turning - good discussion.

PROS - Streching out arm's is proactive. A signal to player, crowd and coach your on the play but distance scope not met...yet.

CONS - Stretched arms is not a NFHS mechanic and gets off balance with partner.

Shaking the head "no" concerns me. Isn't that reacting to the coach?

Think of it as communicating with the coach. He's got a concern about a closely guarded situation. He poses a question (okay, so maybe he's just whining, but still...). You shake your head. He understands.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by OverAndBack


JRut, you know I love ya, so I'm not flaming you or anything (and maybe this is a separate thread), but why is it all about the playoffs?

I thought it was about the kids.

What do you think the kids are focused on? The playoffs. I was when I was their age. The regular season was great, but we wanted to advance in the playoffs. I played high school sports in both Missouri and Illinois and it was all about what happen when we played in the playoffs. The regular season was geared to what we would do when the "real games" started. When my football team was undefeated in the regular season my senior year in HS, it was the biggest deal in our town and the surrounding community. We talked about it in a class reunion I attended a few years back. We lost in the first round and were bumped up to a higher class, and it was a really big disappointment for us as players to not make waves in the playoffs. None of that changes for these kids when they play now. The memories of the entire experience were great with our bond as young men and the memories we carry into adulthood, but we wanted to win a state title just like everyone else. Our regular season was great, but it was a huge disappointment to not do more.

Originally posted by OverAndBack
Now it can certainly be partially about the playoffs. I understand completely that there are officials for whom advancement is the main goal, and that's fine. Far be it for me and my 28 games ever to tell someone why they should or shouldn't officiate, but I've met plenty of officials for whom getting playoff games isn't the be all and end all and doesn't determine their feelings of self-worth as an official.

I know, you should always strive to be the best you can be, and have goals and all that. I just can't agree that it's all about getting playoff games.

You do not have to agree. I love working varsity games all season and getting some high profile games from time to time. It does not mean a whole lot unless you get some playoff games to top off that season. Those games are on another level and validate your season and make all the work worthwhile. All the mechanics I do or not do is about how it might affect how someone sees me and whether or not I will get playoff assignments. Our promotion process is about the playoffs. If you are not a Certified official in this state, you are not likely to work the playoffs. That is really the only reason you get promoted. And then if you are not Certified, it can affect if you are going to get varsity games let alone playoff games. You cannot even be rated in our system if you are not working varsity games. The rating system is not used to help guys become better officials (that is what camps and association meetings are for), it is used to evaluate officials for playoff consideration. The IHSA made sure that was the purpose of the ratings system and changed everything around to make sure that was the only reason it was used for.

Originally posted by OverAndBack
Again, JRut, I'm not coming down on you or trying to start something - your reasons and goals for officiating are yours and are shared by many, no doubt. But I'm sure there are others who don't chase that Holy Grail, and for whom just doing the best they can and trying to get it right is reward enough. I wouldn't call those people lazy no-accounts anymore than I'd call others playoff-chasers.

Of course there are officials that do not want playoff opportunity. I am not saying that has to be your goal. But I can tell you in all my years of experience I very seldom come in contact that work varsity games and have no desire to work the playoffs. The only officials that are not that concerned are officials that have done multiple state finals and their days of working playoffs all the time have past. This is your first year working football and basketball. At this stage of your career you are not going to be eligible for playoff and opportunities related to getting playoff games. Once you are a 5+ year official and you have the opportunity to be a Certified official and your peers at similar years of experience as you are working games and you are not. Or if you are working playoff games and they are not, you will hear a lot of chatter about who got what and who did not get anything in the playoffs. I realize it is not popular to say that, but it is the straight up truth. It is the constant backdrop of conversation of officiating. This month is when the chatter gets hotter and hotter. All the playoff assignments are coming out within a monthÂ’s period of time and who is working them or who is working them is a constant topic of conversation. Even before I received my first playoff assignment I was asked all the time about my playoff assignments. When people found out that I was not Certified and working varsity contests, people were even more surprised and figured I had to be Certified and a playoff official.

Trust me on this one; it is all about the playoffs. Coaches do not keep their jobs at the varsity level if their programs are not winning playoff games or moving far into the playoffs. You might find a coach at the freshman level that has worked for 10-15 years at their particular school. You will not see a coach at a school that long if they are not advancing thru the playoffs consistently and winning Regionals and Sectionals. There is a reason you also see in every gym in the state Regional, Sectional and State Tournament accomplishments along side with conference titles in each sport. If it is not all about the playoffs, there sure is a lot of preoccupation from the coaches, players and fans. The officials are just a product of what the system deals with. What do you think all this private school/public school debate is over? It is all about the playoffs and who won state titles. That debate is not about which academic institution is better. It is about how the playoff structure or the class system should be changed in order to give teams an equal opportunity to advance or compete in the playoffs.

Peace

[Junker]

Hey Rut,
Was that last post in the wrong place? I didn't see how it had to do with the 5 second discussion. Don't confuse me on Fridays!

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Junker
Hey Rut,
Was that last post in the wrong place? I didn't see how it had to do with the 5 second discussion. Don't confuse me on Fridays!

You obviously have not read this entire thread.

Peace

[Junker]

Yep, I did skip the one post. I fell better now. No confusion.

[OverAndBack]

Thanks, Jeff.

I just see the discussion of "it's all about the playoffs" with regard to how officials conduct themselves and "it's all about the playoffs" when it comes to the players' and coaches' hopes and dreams to be two totally separate discussions.

I would hope players and coaches would want to win within the context and framework of what the whole thing is really about (to me, anyway) - developing young men and women and providing them with positive experiences in their formative years as far as coaches are concerned, and learning important life skills, competing and having fun as far as players are concerned.

Yes, this is my first (second in basketball actually) year and I'm nowhere near even being considered for the playoffs but that's not my point - my point was that some people seem to make "getting a playoff game" their entire raison d'etre and they seem to focus on that to the exclusion of the context and framework of that the whole thing is really about (to me, anyway) - striving to do your best and apply the rules fairly and the mechanics correctly to provide a fair playing environment for the two teams of players who are going through the experiences I outlined above.

I figure if you do that, advancement and playoffs take care of themselves, and if they don't, they don't. But there seem to be some (and I'm not saying you're one) who seem to think it's all about them and how much they can accomplish and not about the competitors or the game itself. And at this stage of my career, I simply can't agree with that. If you do or someone else does or I will in the future after I've done this for a while, that's fine.

/hokiness over

[JRutledge]

OverAndBack,

If it was not about the playoffs, I would only work games in a 20 mile radius from my house and officiate games at any level all the time. I could still be the best and use all the proper mechanics. I could also work a lot of games, make more money than I do now officiating and I would save a lot of money on gas and time away from my family or job obligations. It is all about the playoffs.

Peace

[OverAndBack]

For you.

And that's cool.

We all have different agendas and yours and mine are no better or worse than anyone else's.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by OverAndBack
For you.

And that's cool.

We all have different agendas and yours and mine are no better or worse than anyone else's.

I did not put a value judgment on what other people value. I stated that if you work the proper mechanics or accepted mechanics in an area, you will more than likely be rewarded with opportunities that might lead to playoff assignments. If you do not care, then it does not matter what mechanics you use. Of course then you will get games, but you will not work playoff games.

It is not about what my agenda is compared to your agenda. It is about what doing the proper mechanics are going to lead to. So if someone uses this mechanic and it is not accepted, you will not be seen in a good light and probably will be eliminated from playoff consideration. Or when you get a playoff game, your fellow officials will have a problem with your accomplishment.

Peace

[OverAndBack]

My point was - what about doing the proper mechanics because they're the proper mechanics, not because "they" say you need to do it this way to get a playoff game?

[Adam]

Originally posted by Ref Daddy

Wheels turning - good discussion.

PROS - Streching out arm's is proactive. A signal to player, crowd and coach your on the play but distance scope not met...yet.

CONS - Stretched arms is not a NFHS mechanic and gets off balance with partner.

Shaking the head "no" concerns me. Isn't that reacting to the coach?

What's wrong with reacting to the coach? It let's him know two things. First, that he can ask me questions. Second, that I am watching the play and saw the particular event he's asking about.

[Adam]

Originally posted by OverAndBack
My point was - what about doing the proper mechanics because they're the proper mechanics, not because "they" say you need to do it this way to get a playoff game?

Either way, you're doing it because "they" tell you to. The identity of "they" is just the difference. You're saying to do it because the NFHS tells you to, but Rut's saying to do what your local, state, or regional association tells you to do.
The NFHS tells us to stand at the blocks during timeouts, but the IHSAA in Iowa tells us not to. Am I wrong to do it the way my governing body wants it done?

[Stat-Man]

As the POE I believe was this year, the closely guarded was changed this year and I know some officials who will not count unless the defense can touch the offeense. By rule that is not correct.

Then the next night you have a guy calling it as suggested by rule, so it can be very confusing.

Thanks
David

Amen. I've been at a number of HS games in the past 2-3 seasons where the girls were so close they could share the same uniform, and there was no count. So much for the rule philosophy rewarding good defense

I definitely think they should add the signal to the NF chart. It would be a lot more practical than the administrative rule changes they came out with last year.

[Rich]

Originally posted by Stat-Man

Amen. I've been at a number of HS games in the past 2-3 seasons where the girls were so close they could share the same uniform, and there was no count. So much for the rule philosophy rewarding good defense

I definitely think they should add the signal to the NF chart. It would be a lot more practical than the administrative rule changes they came out with last year.

I guess this thread would be the wrong place to talk about officials that haven't put their hand up on a single OOB call all season in about 25 varsity dates. Maybe I'll start another thread. Nah.

BTW, I noticed that about 80% of the OOB calls in the HS game on ESPN2 did not include the stop-clock mechanic.