Hand Checking guidelines

[RonRef]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

These guidelines look very similar to the NCAA-W guidelines, and considering one of the articles on the GPBOA website is written by Don Rutledge, supervisor of officials for the WNBA, it doesn't surprise me there's some NCAA-W influence there. However, I've been told there are no cut-and-dried guidelines such as this in NFHS. I would suggest talking to your assignor or supervisor to see if that's how they want the HS games called.

My personal opinion: I think it takes away some of the judgement involved in the call. For example - two hands on an opponent is a foul. But what if A1 came right at the defender, and B1 puts up their hands as a reaction and A1 contacts both hands. You have to call the foul. But there's also no rules basis for calling it; your explanation to the coach is that's how your association told you to call it. At least in NCAA-W, the guidelines are in the rule book, and when we call it the coach has no basis for a complaint because it's written right there.

Don Rutledge is not the WNBA supervisor, it is Dee Kantner. In women's NCAA we don't give you a warning. The play you decribed is a no call, what I am saying is when a defender put two hands on the dribbler by their own accord.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by RonRef

Don Rutledge is not the WNBA supervisor, it is Dee Kantner.

Are you sure? I thought Dee was originally, but didn't Don take over for her? It mentions Don as the supervisor in the article on the website - under "Articles of Interest", it's "Rutledge's Rules".

Originally Posted by RonRef

In women's NCAA we don't give you a warning. The play you decribed is a no call, what I am saying is when a defender put two hands on the dribbler by their own accord.

I'm aware of that as well. But even NCAA-W have backed off a little from their previous handchecking guidelines because play was being stopped without any obvious advantage being gained. They have put a little judgement back into the call.

The article does kind of contradict itself a little. On one line, it says officials "have the misconception that "I'll call it if it impedes the ball handler". But this is not the direction referees are encouraged to follow." Then it says, "Incidental contact with the hand(s) that does not impede the progress of the ball handler is NOT illegal."

I still think NFHS wants the judgement in there. Maybe we as officials aren't doing a good enough job in calling when it should be called. But I don't think they're ready to put in specific guidelines yet.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Are you sure? I thought Dee was originally, but didn't Don take over for her? It mentions Don as the supervisor in the article on the website - under "Articles of Interest", it's "Rutledge's Rules".

Don has not been the Supervisor since around the late 90s. Dee Kanter replaced Patty Broddrick about 2 years ago.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Don has not been the Supervisor since around the late 90s. Dee Kanter replaced Patty Broddrick about 2 years ago.

Peace

AH HA! It's true!!
You really have been keeping up on the WNBA!



Wasn't Dee originally the supervisor in the beginning as well?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

AH HA! It's true!!
You really have been keeping up on the WNBA!

I knew this for two reasons. Don Rutledge and I share the same last name. And the WNBA started after my first year of officiating. I had not yet developed an open opinion on Women's basketball. After the first WNBA season, I worked a 40+ varsity girl's basketball and about 20 varsity boys’ and it was clear which was most fun.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Wasn't Dee originally the supervisor in the beginning as well?

I do remember she played some role early on, but it was not the Supervisor. I think she has just broken into the NBA and she might have been asked to do something for the WNBA, but I know Don was the first Supervisor.

Peace

[M&M Guy]

JR - you're right about the NFHS guidelines listed. Maybe I wasn't specific about my specificity?

All of the items you list still have a measure of judgement to them - any tactic used to "control", for example, or words such as "tactic...that intentionally slows, prevents, impedes the progress or displaces an opposing player due to the contact". I was just trying to point out there should still be judgement involved in the call. I was responding to the real specific items, such as "any two hands on an opponent", for example.

I do also have to point out a little inconsistancy on your part. You made the comment, "Jim, I would ignore those guidelines completely for NFHS. Several of them are just plain wrong, including the armbars and "tagging" a defender." Well, in your previous post regarding a POE from a previous year:
2) The measuring up of an opponent(tagging) is hand checking, is not permitted, and is a foul.
So there.

So, I'm not saying there shouldn't be guidelines, just not real specific ones like the ones listed that seem to take away the judgement.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I do also have to point out a little inconsistancy on your part. You made the comment, "Jim, I would ignore those guidelines completely for NFHS. Several of them are just plain wrong, including the armbars and "tagging" a defender." Well, in your previous post regarding a POE from a previous year:
2) The measuring up of an opponent(tagging) is hand checking, is not permitted, and is a foul.
So there.

M, I was trying to say that the GPBOA guidelines were wrong, not the FED's. The guidelines that GPBOA issued on their website and posted in the first post of this thread stated "The defensive player's actions of feeling for a screen that may be set to the side or rear is NOT a foul". Well, that, my friend, is a form of "tagging", and the NFHS says that sureashell IS a foul. The FED has been saying that for as long as I can remember too. This ain't the first time that the FED has issued a POE saying that a defender shouldn't be allowed to gain an advantage by feeling for screens, etc. Iow, that GPBOA statement is completely contrary to long-standing FED guidelines, including the one that I outlined in red above. Btw, we teach "warn and call" on that one.

You can either believe something right out of the NFHS rule book, or you can believe something that is posted on the GPBOA web site that is completely opposite. Me? I'm gonna go with the FED.

That's why I would personally ignore everything put out by the GPBOA.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I knew this for two reasons. Don Rutledge and I share the same last name. And the WNBA started after my first year of officiating. I had not yet developed an open opinion on Women's basketball. After the first WNBA season, I worked a 40+ varsity girl's basketball and about 20 varsity boys’ and it was clear which was most fun.
Peace

Don't worry, I won't tell the rest of the neanderthals around here about your secret love of the WNBA.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Don't worry, I won't tell the rest of the neanderthals around here about your secret love of the WNBA.

I could not even tell you when the playoffs started. I cannot stand the NBA, but I at least watched a game or two in the playoffs.

Peace

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I still think NFHS wants the judgement in there. Maybe we as officials aren't doing a good enough job in calling when it should be called. But I don't think they're ready to put in specific guidelines yet.

Oh?

The FED has already issued guidelines. Several times. The most recent one iirc was in the 2003-04 rule book.

POE 2A- HANDCHECKING:
1) Any tactic using the hands, arms or body that allows a player, on offense or defense, to "control"(hold, impede, push, divert, slow or prevent) the movement of an opponent is a foul.
2) When an offensive player uses his or her hands or body to push-off for position, for spacing, for getting open to receive a pass or to move the ball via pass or dribble, it is a foul.
3) "Hooking" by the offensive players should be presumed a definite advantage. This is not a judgement call or tactic worthy of a warning. It is a foul and should be called without hesitation.
4) Any act or tactic of illegal use of the hands, arms or body(offense or defense) that intentionally slows, prevents, impedes the progress or displaces an opposing player due to the contact is a foul and must be called.
5) Regardless of where it takes place on the floor, when a player continuosly places a hand on an opposing player, it is a foul.
6) When a player jabs a hand or forearm on an opponent, it is a foul.

Also from a POE the previous year:
1) No displacement of a cutter
2) The measuring up of an opponent(tagging) is hand checking, is not permitted, and is a foul.
3) Use of a forearm, regardless of the duration of the contact, is a foul.

As you already know,M, NCAA Men and Wimmen set out their own guidelines in the appendices immediately following R10 in the NCAA rule book.

When in doubt, use the rule book.