Team Control Foul - Page 3

Camron Rust · #31 (**permalink**) Mon Jul 25, 2005, 09:58pm

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

Quote:

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Quote:

Originally posted by JRutledge

All you are supposed to do is call a foul, signal the type of foul; point to the other end of the floor; indicate the spot for the designated spot throw-in. That is all that is it. No new signal will be used this year.

Peace

All this discussion about a lack of a signal or confusion and JRutledge's post has a clear element overlook throughout the whole discussion...I've highlighted it in red.

That IS the new signal sequence. Sure, it's not a NEW signal, but its a clear use of existing signals. I've actually seen it used several times in college games.

Pointing the other direction should be clear enough while keeping the nature of the foul (something that the PC signal lacks).

Can't you point to the other end and say, "White 23, you are shooting," too?

Of course...but the next step was designating a spot.

Sure, it's not one signal to communicate the entire message but we've got a set that works.

I think the most important issue in most offensive fouls not involving the player with the ball is the fact that there was a foul on the offense....many coaches and spectators will not have any idea what the whistle was for since they're all watching the ball.

blindzebra · #32 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 26, 2005, 12:04am

Quote:

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

Quote:

Originally posted by Camron Rust

Quote:

Originally posted by JRutledge

All you are supposed to do is call a foul, signal the type of foul; point to the other end of the floor; indicate the spot for the designated spot throw-in. That is all that is it. No new signal will be used this year.

Peace

All this discussion about a lack of a signal or confusion and JRutledge's post has a clear element overlook throughout the whole discussion...I've highlighted it in red.

That IS the new signal sequence. Sure, it's not a NEW signal, but its a clear use of existing signals. I've actually seen it used several times in college games.

Pointing the other direction should be clear enough while keeping the nature of the foul (something that the PC signal lacks).

Can't you point to the other end and say, "White 23, you are shooting," too?

Of course...but the next step was designating a spot.

Sure, it's not one signal to communicate the entire message but we've got a set that works.

I think the most important issue in most offensive fouls not involving the player with the ball is the fact that there was a foul on the offense....many coaches and spectators will not have any idea what the whistle was for since they're all watching the ball.

When I have an off ball call on the offense, everyone knows it. It is very important to vocalize what you have. It's amazing how well a simple illegal screen or push off works.

I still think we should be taking the PC signal to the table for team control fouls.

Camron Rust · #33 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 26, 2005, 11:30am

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

When I have an off ball call on the offense, everyone knows it. It is very important to vocalize what you have. It's amazing how well a simple illegal screen or push off works.

I still think we should be taking the PC signal to the table for team control fouls.

I agree that it is clear once you communicate it as you do...but at the crack of the whistle, a lot of people will be on the edge of their seats awaiting the call. When the call is on ball, many know what the whistle is for before the communication even starts.

While we do have a workable set of signals available, I too would like a single signal (perhaps the PC signal) for a TC foul.

SeanFitzRef · #34 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 26, 2005, 01:10pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Padgett
No way. I'm not giving white 23 any more calls. He's been griping all game. In fact, I think I'll toss him just for the fun of it!

So there.

HE GONE!!!!!!!!