Teaching the Foul Tip

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by M&M Guy


It's either a 3-point shot, or it's not. If it's a 3-point shot, we have a signal for the attempt, and a signal for the made shot. If we do neither, it's not. That's our communication. How far away does the foot need to be for us to not need to signal a "2"? The table shouldn't need to watch for any other signal other than the "touchdown". (Oops, there's another sport's signal in basketball.)

The reason the "2" signal is advocated where I live is so we do not get wrong what just took place. I agree that it is either one or the other, but in both two and 3 person we have dual coverage on this shot many times. It is also very possible that one official does not have the best look and see the toe on the line. If one goes up with the "TD" signal and the other officials does nothing and clearly sees something different, now you have to stop the game and communicate what took place. If you signal that you clearly saw the toe on the line, now I know as his partner I will not tell the table and every person in the gym the shot was a 3. We also do not have to stop the game to correct this confusion. If everyone is taught to do that, I see no problem with that. Most of us only work in one state or one area. We do not have to match what everyone in the country does.

Originally posted by M&M Guy
Sure, if there's a question about a play, we can communicate an answer. And as JRut mentioned earlier, if your local association wants you to communicate that way, then by all means do it. But we have to be careful about over-communicating; that includes using unnecessary signals all the time, as well as, say, talking too much to the coaches.

I am also not advocating using these signals 20 times a game. I might go 10 or more games and never have to use the "tip signal" for a backcourt situation. It might be much longer than before I actually use this signal. It is just a tool, nothing more nothing less. I know if I see the whole play, I usually do absolutely nothing. I just use this signal for partner communication. I do not care what the fans or coaches think. Just like I can help a partner with an out of bounds call, I rarely do unless there is no doubt what took place.

Peace

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by M&M Guy

I think it's safe to say everyone here agrees that communication is important. The best officials are the ones that are great communicators - signals, verbal, facial expressions, even body language.

Now, let me play devil's advocate. The reason we have a prescribed set of signals is so everyone is consistent at the level that is being worked. That is part of our communication; if a player/coach/fan sees a signal one place, but travels 100 miles away and sees a different signal for the same thing, we have not communicated properly. If you go back to mick's original post (and I'm not sure where he's been since - maybe he's in the back yard with his pet skunk) he asks what we are communicating if we DON'T use the tip signal. Does that mean the defense did not tip it, or did he just not see it? My contention would be to not show anything at the time; if it's a violation, we blow the whistle, if it's not, we do nothing. BZ mentioned a pet peeve of mine (although only a small one ), of pointing to the 3-point line and signaling a "2" to the table on a close play. It's either a 3-point shot, or it's not. If it's a 3-point shot, we have a signal for the attempt, and a signal for the made shot. If we do neither, it's not. That's our communication. How far away does the foot need to be for us to not need to signal a "2"? The table shouldn't need to watch for any other signal other than the "touchdown". (Oops, there's another sport's signal in basketball.)

Sure, if there's a question about a play, we can communicate an answer. And as JRut mentioned earlier, if your local association wants you to communicate that way, then by all means do it. But we have to be careful about over-communicating; that includes using unnecessary signals all the time, as well as, say, talking too much to the coaches.

Yes, but if it's close, I've had scorers asking because they thought they might have missed the TD signal.

Why did the NCAA adopt the open hands signal on closely guarded? I mean if we ain't counting it's not a closely guarded situation, right?

In a perfect world, everyone would know exactly what is going on, we'd never have a coach questioning a call, and there would be no need for supportive signals.

This is not a perfect world, and if two fingers pointed down can say, "Yes coach I had a foot on the line," without having to actually say those words or it can avoid a question from the table because they think they might have missed the TD signal, what is the harm?

[26 Year Gap]

Had this occur Sunday and my partner who was the T said the ball was tipped. It was my call and I made the correct call as I saw the tip. On my next trip down the floor I told the coach his player tipped it and he was fine. If my partner asks for help on a call OOB I verbalize if it was tipped. No signal.

I have started to point down to the line on a 2/3 that is close to the line and the coaches appreciate it. I will also flash a 2 to the table on a made attempt that is close. I have no problem with a tip signal, though I do not use it. I think it falls into the category of good game management.

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by blindzebra
Yes, but if it's close, I've had scorers asking because they thought they might have missed the TD signal.

Why did the NCAA adopt the open hands signal on closely guarded? I mean if we ain't counting it's not a closely guarded situation, right?

In a perfect world, everyone would know exactly what is going on, we'd never have a coach questioning a call, and there would be no need for supportive signals.

This is not a perfect world, and if two fingers pointed down can say, "Yes coach I had a foot on the line," without having to actually say those words or it can avoid a question from the table because they think they might have missed the TD signal, what is the harm?

I'm going to use a Jurassic trick - remember, at no point in this discussion have I said whether I use those signals or not.

BZ - If the table missed your TD signal, wouldn't they miss the "2" signal as well? Of course, if something needs to be communicated, we should communicate. If the table has that "huh?" look, then we need to tell them or show them right away so we don't have to stop the game and draw attention to ourselves. And JRut's example of clearing up a mis-communication between partners in a dual coverage area is another good example. But I think we need to get away from the habit of using them all the time.

How would most people feel if we saw an official watch a drive to the basket, then follow it with a "safe" signal to let everyone know he saw the play and there was no foul? That would look kind of strange. If there's a foul, we blow the whistle and hold up our fist, if not, we don't. In the case of the closely guarded count, I was told at a camp once that officials started using the hands-apart signal as a lazy way to let everyone know they were watching, instead of using body language to show they really were in position and watching. Then, there was either a count, or not. For those that work baseball or softball, the closest analogy I can think of is when you call balls and strikes - it's either a strike or a ball. When I did softball, I was taught that it's not "ball, low", or "juuuust a bit outside". If someone asks, you can tell them. But I was told it shows either weakness or a lack of confidence if you have to explain and justify every call. Wouldn't that apply to basketball? We don't have to explain every close 2 or 3-point shot, or every time the ball is tipped before going in the backcourt. If someone, say our partner or the table, needs to know, of course we communicate with them. But if we start to do it all the time, we might not be projecting that confidence and court presence.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by M&M Guy

I'm going to use a Jurassic trick - remember, at no point in this discussion have I said whether I use those signals or not.

BZ - If the table missed your TD signal, wouldn't they miss the "2" signal as well? Of course, if something needs to be communicated, we should communicate. If the table has that "huh?" look, then we need to tell them or show them right away so we don't have to stop the game and draw attention to ourselves. And JRut's example of clearing up a mis-communication between partners in a dual coverage area is another good example. But I think we need to get away from the habit of using them all the time.

How would most people feel if we saw an official watch a drive to the basket, then follow it with a "safe" signal to let everyone know he saw the play and there was no foul? That would look kind of strange. If there's a foul, we blow the whistle and hold up our fist, if not, we don't. In the case of the closely guarded count, I was told at a camp once that officials started using the hands-apart signal as a lazy way to let everyone know they were watching, instead of using body language to show they really were in position and watching. Then, there was either a count, or not. For those that work baseball or softball, the closest analogy I can think of is when you call balls and strikes - it's either a strike or a ball. When I did softball, I was taught that it's not "ball, low", or "juuuust a bit outside". If someone asks, you can tell them. But I was told it shows either weakness or a lack of confidence if you have to explain and justify every call. Wouldn't that apply to basketball? We don't have to explain every close 2 or 3-point shot, or every time the ball is tipped before going in the backcourt. If someone, say our partner or the table, needs to know, of course we communicate with them. But if we start to do it all the time, we might not be projecting that confidence and court presence.

Bad analogy. In baseball or softball the majority of all calls made at the plate are balls and strikes. Every pitch to every batter has a call, it's black or white, so yes if you add something to 50% of your calls it looks bad.

We are talking about helping a partner with a tip signal, once every couple of games, perhaps once or twice a season.

How many times a game does a player take a shot toeing the 3 point line? What percentage of our decisions does that 2 finger point come into play?

I disagree, I think it actually helps your court presence. A well timed, crisp signal that heads off any problems/questions and keeps the game going without delays adds to your overall court presence, IMO.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by M&M Guy


BZ - If the table missed your TD signal, wouldn't they miss the "2" signal as well?

No. You give the "2" signal to make it clear what the result of the shot was. I commonly give the signal to the table so we do not wait until the next 10 times up the court before we correct an obvious mistake. Since I have done this I cannot think of one time the table was unaware of what the proper points should be. At the very least that does not happen that much in 3 Person mechanics.

Originally posted by M&M Guy
How would most people feel if we saw an official watch a drive to the basket, then follow it with a "safe" signal to let everyone know he saw the play and there was no foul? That would look kind of strange. If there's a foul, we blow the whistle and hold up our fist, if not, we don't.

I am not sure if you work baseball or softball, umpires make "safe" calls because they have to call something. Either the runner is safe or that runner is out. We do not just make a call just to make one.

Originally posted by M&M Guy
In the case of the closely guarded count, I was told at a camp once that officials started using the hands-apart signal as a lazy way to let everyone know they were watching, instead of using body language to show they really were in position and watching. Then, there was either a count, or not.

The "not" closely guarded signal is a college mechanic. It is there to purposely communicate to everyone that the official no longer has a count. I agree that signal should not be used at the HS level (unless approved for use) but that is the college way. The college ranks has no problem with making things clear and they use many more signals to help their officials communicate things that are not so obvious.

Originally posted by M&M Guy
For those that work baseball or softball, the closest analogy I can think of is when you call balls and strikes - it's either a strike or a ball. When I did softball, I was taught that it's not "ball, low", or "juuuust a bit outside". If someone asks, you can tell them. But I was told it shows either weakness or a lack of confidence if you have to explain and justify every call. Wouldn't that apply to basketball?

Again this is not a good comparison, because in baseball (or softball) we are not supposed to signal or tell anything else but ball or strike. In those games there could be about 300 pitches or so depending on the length of the game and you might make a call on half of those pitches give or take 50 or so. In basketball an official might not have one backcourt violation the entire game. Not one violation involving the BC. But it is also very acceptable in baseball to signal to your partner or partners what kind of rotation we are going to make or what we might be aware of when the ball is hit. I do not hear anyone ever complaining those signals are not necessary or overkill.

Originally posted by M&M Guy
We don't have to explain every close 2 or 3-point shot, or every time the ball is tipped before going in the backcourt. If someone, say our partner or the table, needs to know, of course we communicate with them. But if we start to do it all the time, we might not be projecting that confidence and court presence.

I really do not think anyone said to do in on every close 2 or 3 point shot. Many times it depending on the competence of the table personnel and the configuration of the court, I am dealing with. I have literally worked basketball games in many parts of this state. I can tell you sometimes we have to make those signals because the table is blocked off from certain corners of the court and cannot see an official signal or not signal. We are not always working with the most competent people or even adults for that matter. I learned relatively early in my career if you do not sometimes make it very clear to the table you ruled a 2 instead of a 3, they will put what they think they saw (which unfortunately is not always the officials) and you will have to try to remember if you had a 3 several plays ago. I had two correctable errors in one season and not only did I personally ask questions to avoid these situations, the table clearly said "no" when I asked them very specific questions to avoid these errors. If officials are openly communicating when the ball is dead and we have time, what makes you think the table might do when they are not watching the officials?

Peace

[M&M Guy]

BZ - If the table missed your TD signal, wouldn't they miss the "2" signal as well?

No. You give the "2" signal to make it clear what the result of the shot was.

That was a kind of toungue-in-cheek answer to BZ's comment about the table not seeing the 3-point TD signal. If they didn't see both of your arms up in the air, how in the world would they see your 2 fingers?

How would most people feel if we saw an official watch a drive to the basket, then follow it with a "safe" signal to let everyone know he saw the play and there was no foul? That would look kind of strange. If there's a foul, we blow the whistle and hold up our fist, if not, we don't.

I am not sure if you work baseball or softball, umpires make "safe" calls because they have to call something. Either the runner is safe or that runner is out. We do not just make a call just to make one.

You might've missed my point on this one. I was talking about a basketball referee making a "safe" signal. I actually saw a new referee do this; his reasoning was to communicate that he saw the play and there was no foul. This is exactly the reasoning behind all these other "unapproved" signals. My point was this one looked funny; I can see how some of the other unapproved signals can look funny if not everyone is using the same signals.

In the case of the closely guarded count, I was told at a camp once that officials started using the hands-apart signal as a lazy way to let everyone know they were watching, instead of using body language to show they really were in position and watching. Then, there was either a count, or not.

The "not" closely guarded signal is a college mechanic. It is there to purposely communicate to everyone that the official no longer has a count. I agree that signal should not be used at the HS level (unless approved for use) but that is the college way. The college ranks has no problem with making things clear and they use many more signals to help their officials communicate things that are not so obvious.

We agree on this one - if it's an approved signal, let's use it, if not, don't.

For those that work baseball or softball, the closest analogy I can think of is when you call balls and strikes - it's either a strike or a ball. When I did softball, I was taught that it's not "ball, low", or "juuuust a bit outside". If someone asks, you can tell them. But I was told it shows either weakness or a lack of confidence if you have to explain and justify every call. Wouldn't that apply to basketball?

Again this is not a good comparison, because in baseball (or softball) we are not supposed to signal or tell anything else but ball or strike.

Again - exactly my point. Why wouldn't this apply to basketball? We're only supposed to signal a "3" and not a "2". If there's an over-and-back violation, there's a signal for that, but if there isn't a violation, there's no signal in the manual for "no violation".

We don't have to explain every close 2 or 3-point shot, or every time the ball is tipped before going in the backcourt. If someone, say our partner or the table, needs to know, of course we communicate with them. But if we start to do it all the time, we might not be projecting that confidence and court presence.

I really do not think anyone said to do in on every close 2 or 3 point shot. Many times it depending on the competence of the table personnel and the configuration of the court, I am dealing with.

Again, I don't disagree that we need to be able to communicate in unusual circumstances. An unknowledgable table crew, or a table that has a partially blocked view, or an unusual play that requires something extra from us certainly counts towards using whatever communication we can give, including these signals. Maybe I'm not as hard-line as some others on this board by saying I have no problem with using "unapproved" signals when necessary. I think there are still a few that feel if it's not shown in the book, don't ever use it. But I am a little leery of using them all the time. Granted, we don't have over-and-back calls every game, or close 2 or 3-point shots every game. But if we use those signals every time it happens, I think that's too often.

[JRutledge]

All I am trying to say is whether it is "approved" or not is not a good reason to use it or not in my opinion. If that was the case we would never have a "kick" signal. I never heard anyone complain when this signal was used before the NF and CCA adopted it. That was rarely used too, but for some reason every officials that had any experience used it. There are a lot of things the NF never talks about or explains what we should do. So to be caught up on things that are "approved" is not looking at the bigger picture. This is also what pre-games are for and training is supposed to do. I can work with certain people and not have to use any "special" signal or say certain things because I know what they are thinking when they do it. It is completely up to you to decide if a signal should be used. I use them to avoid stopping the clock and coming back and correct a problem. If you do not mind doing that, that is certainly your choice. There is more than one way to the mountain. I have yet to find any two officials that do everything the exact same.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by JRutledge
All I am trying to say is whether it is "approved" or not is not a good reason to use it or not in my opinion. If that was the case we would never have a "kick" signal. I never heard anyone complain when this signal was used before the NF and CCA adopted it. That was rarely used too, but for some reason every officials that had any experience used it. There are a lot of things the NF never talks about or explains what we should do. So to be caught up on things that are "approved" is not looking at the bigger picture.

Once again, I don't really disagree with most of your overall statements. I'm certainly not obsessed with the topic, or losing my overall perspective. (Although I'm sure that's not the case with other subjects, however...) I'm just trying to get a handle on where the line is between doing everything "by the book", and doing your own thing. I guess I've been taught enough to become uncomfortable using "unapproved" signals on a regular basis. But I have no problem when a ball goes into the backcourt, and a coach stands up and says, "Hey!...", I'll give the foul tip signal and say, "#14 touched it last." There was a question and I communicated an answer. But should we give that signal every time the ball is tipped into the backcourt? How close to the line does the player need to be for us to show the "2" signal vs. the "3"? If 1" is close enough, is 3" far enough away to not need it, or is it 5"? Why even bother; shouldn't the table know that it's a "3" if we signal it, or it's not? How about the official that gave the safe sign on the drive to communicate there was no foul? Would you incorporate that signal into your game? I know I'm not; but why is that "unapproved" signal not going to catch on (I hope), but others are ok?

Again, if there is an unusual situation or a question arises where something needs to be communicated, by all means, communicate it. I guess I feel that just because a play is close doesn't make it unusual, therefore we should stick to the "approved" signals.

Uh, oh...does this put me in the old fuddy-duddy camp?

[tjones1]

If a player uses his/her fist intentionally (never seen it), but do you use the kick signal?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by tjones1
If a player uses his/her fist intentionally (never seen it), but do you use the kick signal?

No, use a "fist" signal like throwing a jab. It ain't official but it lets everybody know what you called- which is the idea behind using signals in the first place. You're gonna have to explain it anyway , no matter what, if you do call it. It's pretty much guaranteed that whovever you've called it against will (a)have never heard of the rule- or (b)won't believe you.

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
No, use a "fist" signal like throwing a jab. It ain't official but it lets everybody know what you called- which is the idea behind using signals in the first place.

GASP! Another "unapproved" signal? What's this world coming to?

So, do you jab with the left hand, if you're right-handed, like any good boxer? Or do you make the jab with the hand closest to the table? Or, perhaps, you make the jab at the player, instead of pointing at him with your hand?

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by M&M Guy


How close to the line does the player need to be for us to show the "2" signal vs. the "3"? If 1" is close enough, is 3" far enough away to not need it, or is it 5"? Why even bother; shouldn't the table know that it's a "3" if we signal it, or it's not?

If you worked in the Chicago Public League, you would be surprised how many kids are working the table. They are not watching the game half the time or even completely understand what their job is. If I cannot guarantee the scorer not putting in a foul number before I report the foul, I am not going to always trust them they know the difference. I know when I work college ball, those table people tend to be more experienced and more concerned about following the official's lead.

Originally posted by M&M Guy
How about the official that gave the safe sign on the drive to communicate there was no foul? Would you incorporate that signal into your game? I know I'm not; but why is that "unapproved" signal not going to catch on (I hope), but others are ok?

Have you ever seen a D1 officials use that signal on TV? Have you ever seen an NBA official use that signal on TV? That should tell you everything you need to know right there. If a veteran officials is stupid enough to use a signal based solely on what a new officials does, that veteran should probably not be there.

Originally posted by M&M Guy
Again, if there is an unusual situation or a question arises where something needs to be communicated, by all means, communicate it. I guess I feel that just because a play is close doesn't make it unusual, therefore we should stick to the "approved" signals.

Again I think you are reading way too much into what I said. I did not say do something because it was close. Sometimes the close plays are the easiest to see or to recognize. I also know I am not trying to tell you what to do or how to use an "unapproved" signal. I know I am going to continue to use these signals during the season and I have never been told not to by anyone of significance. This conversation is interesting, but it is not going to change my philosophy. So if you feel these signals are "out of line" then do not use them. You are not going to hurt my feelings. I remember officials that would not birddog before it the mechanics were changed. It does not offend me when guys choose not to do that. We are not robots and we will never become robots. The signals are there as a starting point and as people learn more about this hobby, they incorporate many things into their game they see fit. If you want to stick directly with the book, you are not going to make me upset or anyone upset for that matter.

Peace

[tjones1]

Thanks J R

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by JRutledge
Have you ever seen a D1 officials use that signal on TV? Have you ever seen an NBA official use that signal on TV? That should tell you everything you need to know right there. If a veteran officials is stupid enough to use a signal based solely on what a new officials does, that veteran should probably not be there.

Now, you might be on to something there. Perhaps some of these signals evolved from veteren officials who used them. And, since most of us like to emulate our heroes, other officials started using those same signals, techniques, and mannerisms. And, you're certainly right - if I start using a new signal taught to me by a new official: please have the IHSA yank my certification immediately.

We are not robots and we will never become robots. The signals are there as a starting point and as people learn more about this hobby, they incorporate many things into their game they see fit. If you want to stick directly with the book, you are not going to make me upset or anyone upset for that matter.

If I start wandering around the court saying, "Danger! Danger, Will Robinson!", the same thing applies: yank my certification.

Seriously, it's still interesting to me to find that fine line. I guess I had been taught the rules and mechanics are not a "starting point", but the entire road map. Sure, we can take a detour every now and then, but how often do we take detours before we're off course? Maybe it's an individual thing. Some people can get away with more detours because they're stronger in other areas. In my feeble mind (and I'm not even French), I need to stay on the correct signal road as much as possible, because I'm not sure I'm a complete enough official to get away with too many detours. I would think it would be a good idea to teach the less-experienced officials to stay as close to the path as possible, until they're knowledgable enough to stray, so to speak.