The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 23, 2005, 06:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Central Illinois
Posts: 1,955
I've been thinking about the new team control foul rule. All non-intentional, non-flagrant, non-technical fouls by the offensive team will now fall under this rule, right? Is this intended to simplify things and speed things up? What's the rationale? Anyone know?
__________________
That's my whistle -- and I'm sticking to it!
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 23, 2005, 06:45pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Cool

I really don't know specifically what the rationale is for this, but any rule that makes the HS game more like the college game is good IMO.

I don't know why we just don't adopt college rules for HS. It would make things a lot simpler.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sat Jul 23, 2005, 08:57pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 2,910
Quote:
Originally posted by refnrev
I've been thinking about the new team control foul rule. All non-intentional, non-flagrant, non-technical fouls by the offensive team will now fall under this rule, right? Is this intended to simplify things and speed things up? What's the rationale? Anyone know?
1) It's designed to speed the game up, yes.

2) All fouls by the team in control are the ones that fall under this rule. I know that's splitting hairs in a way... but some would refer to a rebounding foul on the team that just attempted a shot as an "offensive rebounding foul." Since team control ended when the shot went up, this kind of foul would not be a team control foul and we would still shoot bonus free throws.

Z
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 24, 2005, 11:17am
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Red face

BTW - the new mechanic for this call is to use one finger on each hand in the "shame, shame" motion.

Please, no cracks about which finger.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 24, 2005, 12:52pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Question

Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
I really don't know specifically what the rationale is for this, but any rule that makes the HS game more like the college game is good IMO.

I don't know why we just don't adopt college rules for HS. It would make things a lot simpler.
Mark,
Men's or Women's?
Who will hire the unemployed Rulesmakers?
Who will teach the players the new rules?
Does Fed reimburse NCAA for doing the work?
Would high school and college camps run concurrently?
What shirts do officials wear?

Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 24, 2005, 03:38pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Quote:
Originally posted by mick
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
I really don't know specifically what the rationale is for this, but any rule that makes the HS game more like the college game is good IMO.

I don't know why we just don't adopt college rules for HS. It would make things a lot simpler.
Mark,
Men's or Women's?
Who will hire the unemployed Rulesmakers?
Who will teach the players the new rules?
Does Fed reimburse NCAA for doing the work?
Would high school and college camps run concurrently?
What shirts do officials wear?

1. Men's for boys games. Women's for girls games. DUH!
2. FEEBLE
3. The same people who teach them now - no one.
4. Yeah, like the NCAA needs more money.
5. Um, sure. Like I know what "concurrently" means.
6. Referee jerseys.

__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jul 24, 2005, 07:19pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
Quote:
Originally posted by refnrev
I've been thinking about the new team control foul rule. All non-intentional, non-flagrant, non-technical fouls by the offensive team will now fall under this rule, right? Is this intended to simplify things and speed things up? What's the rationale? Anyone know?
With the new rule, all fouls by the team in control are treated the same...no more "Did that player pass the ball before they crashed into the defender or after??" We don't have A3 being called for a PC foul and B getting no free throws, and then B2 being called for an illegal screen at the other end and A gets free throws...it really makes it much simpler.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 09:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 4,801
Quote:
Originally posted by mick

What shirts do officials wear?
I say we go to the soccer shirts. I think I'd look good in blue.
__________________
"To win the game is great. To play the game is greater. But to love the game is the greatest of all."
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 10:26am
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Quote:
Originally posted by mick

What shirts do officials wear?
I say we go to the soccer shirts. I think I'd look good in blue.
You said the "S word".
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 11:00am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 4,801
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Quote:
Originally posted by mick

What shirts do officials wear?
I say we go to the soccer shirts. I think I'd look good in blue.
You said the "S word".
Would you rather me say the "F word"?
__________________
"To win the game is great. To play the game is greater. But to love the game is the greatest of all."
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 11:13am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,528
Signals

Apparently the NF is not going to use a new signal for this foul either. Did anyone else here see the Referee Magazine article on the new rules for this coming year?

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
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 11:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Re: Signals

Quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge
Apparently the NF is not going to use a new signal for this foul either. Did anyone else here see the Referee Magazine article on the new rules for this coming year?

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
Well, speaking as one of those bumpkins south of I-80 it seem like there will be confusion as to communicating which type of foul we have, "offensive" or "defensive". Granted, I'm looking at it from a NCAA-W perspective, but their signal of the "punch" definitely conveys we are not shooting any bonus free throws. Any other signal conveys it wasn't an offensive foul. In the case of a NF foul, we could give a signal for a push, point to a spot OOB, and our partners not know what's happening until we get to the table and give the color of the offensive team. Even then, if it's a rebounding foul, there might be some confusion as to whether we are shooting the bonus or not. Granted, the new mechanic has us pointing the other direction, but I'm not sure that still effectively communicates "no shots". It will be interesting to see how that plays out this year.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 12:05pm
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,528
Re: Re: Signals

Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy


Well, speaking as one of those bumpkins south of I-80 it seem like there will be confusion as to communicating which type of foul we have, "offensive" or "defensive". Granted, I'm looking at it from a NCAA-W perspective, but their signal of the "punch" definitely conveys we are not shooting any bonus free throws. Any other signal conveys it wasn't an offensive foul. In the case of a NF foul, we could give a signal for a push, point to a spot OOB, and our partners not know what's happening until we get to the table and give the color of the offensive team. Even then, if it's a rebounding foul, there might be some confusion as to whether we are shooting the bonus or not. Granted, the new mechanic has us pointing the other direction, but I'm not sure that still effectively communicates "no shots". It will be interesting to see how that plays out this year.
I know I will press those about this when the meetings start. I work for the head clinician of our state in his conference. I will make sure I ask him about this issue directly.

BTW I started officiating below I-80 too. I just roll my eyes when I hear those comments.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 12:07pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Re: Re: Signals

Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
Even then, if it's a rebounding foul, there might be some confusion as to whether we are shooting the bonus or not.
M&M Guy,
Which team is in control on a rebound?
mick

Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jul 25, 2005, 12:09pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
[/B]
Well, speaking as one of those bumpkins south of I-80, it seem like there will be confusion as to communicating which type of foul we have, "offensive" or "defensive". Granted, I'm looking at it from a NCAA-W perspective, but their signal of the "punch" definitely conveys we are not shooting any bonus free throws. Any other signal conveys it wasn't an offensive foul. In the case of a NF foul, we could give a signal for a push, point to a spot OOB, and our partners not know what's happening until we get to the table and give the color of the offensive team. Even then, if it's a rebounding foul, there might be some confusion as to whether we are shooting the bonus or not. Granted, the new mechanic has us pointing the other direction, but I'm not sure that still effectively communicates "no shots". It will be interesting to see how that plays out this year. [/B][/QUOTE]Use any signal that you want to use.

Didn't you read the other thread?

Mary Struckhoff said it was OK.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:24am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1