I haven't said much on this thread, but I feel I have a position now, which is defensible. IT DEPENDS ON THE LEVEL. Sixth grade girls, I'm not going to call this kind of thing. In fact, I may blow it dead and hand it off for a re-do. JV boys, state champion school against biggest cross-town rival, (In Portland, that's Jefferson-Benson most years) I'm going by the strictest guidelines. At the levels in between, I may call it or give the player a look and let it go depending on the level of play in that game.

I mean, I did several games this year where any girl of any age who could dribble at all was varsity, and the freshmen team had no one but girls who had literally never played at all anywhere until they walked onto the court in November to try out. These girls get maximum number of explanations and re-do chances in my book. Usually, they're getting stomped and are lucky to score at all, even if they can manage to keep possession for more than a few seconds.

But at the higher levels of play, I will call this kind of stuff. A violation does not have to be intentional or tricky to be a violation. A fumble, a lack of concentration, a broken play -- at the upper levels these are mistakes, and if they result in a violation, they must be called.

Thats my story and I'm stickin' to it.

Until my son is playing varsity, and then we'll see....

So what is the record for number of pages?

I humbly submit that we leave this poor horse alone.

Wait Brian, I can still see it breathing! Let's kick it
again...



Rainmaker, go back to the rules references I gave and tell
me again how a *fumble* on the inbounds is the same as
a *pass* on the inbounds.

Juulie - as you know, I have been on the Board of a local rec league for 12 years and we have kids as low as 3rd grade. Our philosophy, which was developed over the 20+ years the league has been in existence, is (at lower levels) to call the violation, then explain it to the kids. We feel by doing that, it impresses in their yet-developed minds the actual violation and they are more likely to try not to repeat it. Not only do we feel this is the best way to teach kids the rules of the game, but it takes the burden off the refs in relation to being consistent. The more we use subjectivity in these instances (and I'm not making a case here not to ever use subjectivity), the more inconsistent we become.

BTW - we can discuss this further tomorrow (Sat) since you told me we have some games together at The Hoop in Vancouver, WA.

Also BTW - good news for Portland area basketball fans - The Hoop in Beaverton is reopening under new management, including former Trailblazers Larry Steele and Danny Anderson. It was closed for about a month, which eliminated six courts from use here. First adult league games are this Sunday night.

Horse still has life!
 

I must admit I've moved in my position. The key difference for me was the "fumble" versus "pass" definitions. At the moment I'm blowing it dead if the offense acts like they've lost the opportunity for a <u>real</u> inbound pass. As described initially, <i>tweet</i> and I pass the ball to the offense for the inbound. (Then during the timeout I'll explain it to the other coach.) I hope they just step in, secure the ball, step OOB, and away we go....

What would I do?

Shoot the horse, or knock on wood!

AK ref SE