Closely guarded? No. Just throw out your arms.

[Rick82358]

The criteria for a closely guarded count are being within 6' and ACTIVELY Guarding the player with the ball. A defender who is just standing within 6' of the player with the ball should not cause you to start a count.

How can you adjust for players being shorter or taller? the distance between the players feet is what you are looking at, it is a static distance always 6'. If two players are 6' tall and both are bent at the waist that puts them almost touching with their upper bodies If they are shorter then the distance will be larger between their upper bodies but they will still be 6' apart.

If the mechanic bothers you or your assoc. says do not use it then do not use it - I seriously do not believe it is going to hurt your ratings any evaluator worth their salt will look at the whole picture of how you are officiating. The book says nothing about talking to players about pushing and shoving or telling them to move out of the paint that is just good preventive officiating - but will it get you a lower rating - doubt it.
But if I have a coach in a NFHS game who is constantly harping for a five second call and the player isn't within the 6' or is moving in and out of that zone I am going to use it as a communication tool for that coach to realize that IMO we do not have a count and why. The hope is that it will shut them up.

But the most important thing that needs to be said is that when both criteria are met, the defender is within 6' and actively guarding the ball - YOU HAVE A COUNT. That will make the rest of this conversation irrelevant.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Rick82358
The criteria for a closely guarded count are being within 6' and ACTIVELY Guarding the player with the ball. A defender who is just standing within 6' of the player with the ball should not cause you to start a count.

While I certainly agree with the concept of actively-guarding, by rule you are completely wrong. There is no requirement listed anywhere in the rule or case book listing "actively-guarding" as a criteria. The requirements to start and maintain a closely-guarded count are spelled out in case book 9.10.1Sitc. Nowhere in that case book play is it stated that you must be "actively guarding" someone at any time. Note the wording at the end of the RULING- "The amount of movement or the actual body position of the player is irrelevant".

[Nevadaref]

Rick,
While you argue your position with passion and do have the spirit of the rules behind you, please consider that the word "actively" is not used in the rules book regarding this situation. Just in case any newer officials who read this thread might take what you have written as definitive, I feel compelled to mention this. It is true that the player with the ball does have to be "guarded", but how you define that word is of the utmost importance. The NFHS definition is below.


RULE 4
SECTION 10 CLOSELY GUARDED
A closely guarded situation occurs when a player in control of the ball in his/her team's frontcourt, is continuously guarded by any opponent who is within 6 feet of the player who is holding or dribbling the ball.

SECTION 23 GUARDING
ART. 1 . . . Guarding is the act of legally placing the body in the path of an offensive opponent. There is no minimum distance required between the guard and opponent, but the maximum is 6 feet when closely guarded.


Using these definitions a solid case can be made that just standing in front of an opponent constitutes guarding, and just being within six feet of that opponent qualifies as closely guarding.

[Nevadaref]

That durn JR is just so durn fast! He beat me to it again! That is a great case book reference BTW.

Here's the case book play that he cited:

9.10.1 SITUATION C: Team A has the ball in its own frontcourt. B1 stands within 6 feet and facing A1 while A1 is holding the ball near the division line. RULING: In five seconds this would be a violation. In the situation outlined, as soon as B1 has assumed a guarding position, both feet on the court, facing the opponent, no other specific requirement is in effect. The amount of movement or the actual body position of the player is irrelevant.


[The bold emphasis is mine.]

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by johnny1784
I don’t think it is a useful mechanic. I am not a certified NCAA official, yet there isn’t any need to use a signal that means the same by not using any signal at all to indicate there isn’t any closely guarded situation.

That's true *IF* there are only two choices.

In this case, though, there are three.

1) The player is closely guarded (count)

2) The player is not closely guarded (spread hands)

3) The official isn't watching.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Unlike my post in the Inadvertant Timeout thread, I hope that this post was not circumlocutory.


MTD, Sr.

Objection, your honor! Opposing counsel is using big words!

[Rich]

Originally posted by Cager ref 1989
Wow! If there are many more comments on this thread we're gonna need to petition NFHS to include this topic on next seasons 'Points of Emphasis'.
My main point was that in my judgement the defender (2 feet on floor facing opponent) is WELL within 6 ft on MANY occasions when the official is observed holding both arms out to side as if the defender must be within 2, maybe 3 ft before a 5 sec. count will begin...
To me...it's just elementary being able to judge whether there is good defense and will we as officials recognize that and give him/her a count.
Most HS players are, on avg., 6 ft tall.
If a HS player is standing at a distance that once lying flat on floor would be touching their opponent, BEGIN THE COUNT, they are close enough. What are we waiting on?

Personally, i think 6 feet is too far and I like the NCAAW rule (3 feet) better.

Yet, since I take a check, I follow the rules. Unless the ball is held way out front, I usually have a count of some kind working. And the better the coach, the quicker they'll demand a count when the defender is within six feet.

[All_Heart]

Originally posted by johnny1784

Some even use the "fingers-to-hand-slap" indicating a ball was blocked. Now that mechanic might be useful when during a dead ball words won’t be heard to communicate to an irate coach.

This is a big pet peeve of mine. Some also use the Gator chop <.

I was watching a game last night and the lead used this mechanic to indicate that it was blocked. The trail was near half court and didn't have position to help on the play but there was definitely a foul and if I was trail I would have called it. That makes the crew look great when one calls a foul and the other is saying that it was blocked!

[Rick82358]

JR and Nevada
You are correct - actively is not used.
Guarding is - I interpret Guarding to be a verb - but then again so is standing.
So under the spirit of the rule I state my case.

[assignmentmaker]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

That's true *IF* there are only two choices.

In this case, though, there are three.

1) The player is closely guarded (count)

2) The player is not closely guarded (spread hands)

3) The official isn't watching.

Exactly

[Rich]

Originally posted by All_Heart

This is a big pet peeve of mine. Some also use the Gator chop <.

I was watching a game last night and the lead used this mechanic to indicate that it was blocked. The trail was near half court and didn't have position to help on the play but there was definitely a foul and if I was trail I would have called it. That makes the crew look great when one calls a foul and the other is saying that it was blocked!

It's not THAT bad. "I had a different angle/view of it, coach."

[All_Heart]

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser

It's not THAT bad. "I had a different angle/view of it, coach."

Yes but the tip signal does nothing but cause problems. Obviously if we didn't call a foul then we determined that it was a block shot. The only thing that can be accomplished by using this signal is making the crew look bad IMO.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by All_Heart

I was watching a game last night and the lead used this mechanic to indicate that it was blocked. The trail was near half court and didn't have position to help on the play but there was definitely a foul and if I was trail I would have called it. That makes the crew look great when one calls a foul and the other is saying that it was blocked!

That's why I use this very, very rarely. In situations where I do, it's after the play has gone the other way, and in response to a coach's question - basically when I don't have time to give a 3 minute explaination of how a block is not a foul.

[Texas Aggie]

Its not a "stupid" mechanic. I think there's good reason for it to be used AFTER a count has started, but it being stopped due to the 6 foot minimum distance being compromised. I confess to using it probably more than I should, but I err on the side of communication.

I think the use of the mechanic will eliminate some arguments from coaches. They may not agree that the defender was outside of 6 feet, but at least they understand that YOU think he is and aren't forgetting to count.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Texas Aggie
Its not a "stupid" mechanic. I think there's good reason for it to be used AFTER a count has started, but it being stopped due to the 6 foot minimum distance being compromised. I confess to using it probably more than I should, but I err on the side of communication.

I think the use of the mechanic will eliminate some arguments from coaches. They may not agree that the defender was outside of 6 feet, but at least they understand that YOU think he is and aren't forgetting to count.

Like I said in an earlier post. It is a stupid mechcanic. If the official is not giving a visual count then there is no closely guarded situation.

MTD, Sr.