game plat situation #2 - Page 4

crew · #46 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 18, 2001, 02:56am

Quote:

BTW, I bet they didn't teach you that at a high school camp. One of the biggest problems in high school basketball today is that too many officials go to camp, come home, and try to apply college mechanics, philosphies and rules to high school basketball. For those who do this, give us all a break and stop calling HS ball. You're just making it more difficult for the rest of us.

[/B]

an even bigger problem is that some officials dont go to camp. therefor they stay stagnant and do not get any better. highschool basketball is a good farm system for people who want to get into college. even at some highschool levels the level of basketball is college level. therefor an official must up his level of officiating and "evolve" with the game. these plays that i write are difficult to get correct if you have never seen this level of basketball. i write them to stimulate and thought provoke your mind to understand athleticism. play calling is harder than applying rules. judgement is another factor that seperates college officials from highschool. if you care to move up at all listen to ero39, and drake m. they have great advice. and for those of you who dont care to get better give the kids a break and stop calling highschool ball.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. · #47 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 18, 2001, 10:01am

Crew: I get the feeling that you firmly believe that a player who is not standing on his feet is not entitled to his spot on the floor. So let me pose this play for you.

B1 has obtained (NFHS)/established (NCAA & FIBA) a legal guarding position with respect to A1 who is dribbling the ball. A1 dribbles directly toward B1 and B1 backs up as A1 dribbles toward him. As A1 gets close to B1, B1 stumbles backwards and lands on his backside and A1 continues dribbling right over B1 and (a) makes contact with B1's chest with his foot or (b) trips over B1 and fall to the floor while holding the ball.

Your assignment if you choose to accept is to make rulings for both (a) and (b), citing both rule and casebook plays. You may use NFHS, NCAA, and/or FIBA rules and casebook plays. This tape will self destruct in ten seconds.

crew · #48 (**permalink**) Tue Dec 18, 2001, 02:01pm

mark,
i accept your challenge. i will write it tonite(dec 18) or tommorrow.
take care

BBarnaky · #49 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 02, 2002, 01:56pm

I will agree with those who answered a foul on the player lying on the floor. As an ex-player and now official myself common sense tells all fans, players, coaches, and officials that a player who makes an athletic play at the rim level and grabs a rebound is entitled to land with his feet firmly on the floor without having to hurdle or dodge a player lying sprawled out on the ground. I would have a foul here.

As far as the comments about going to camp and applying NCAA and NBA rules and philosophies to high school games, I have no comment for such low blows. However, there aren't enough good officials out there to begin with from middle school and on up the playing levels. Let's keep a big picture approach and not direct comments at people who do work in several higher leagues and high school at the same time. The game is in NEED of good officials and good people

Mark Dexter · #50 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 02, 2002, 03:34pm

Quote:

Originally posted by BBarnaky
As an ex-player and now official myself common sense tells all fans, players, coaches, and official

So you use common sense. Great! The rules aren't always based on common sense, though. Common sense would tell me that if A1 inbounded the ball, and then B1 tapped the ball OOB where it touched A1 that A should get the ball. The rule, however, says that B gets the ball.

BTW, I'd advise you to get a few more than three posts under your belt before you come on here and start criticising everyone in sight.

Dan_ref · #51 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 02, 2002, 03:45pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
[QUOTE
....
BTW, I'd advise you to get a few more than three posts under your belt before you come on here and start criticising everyone in sight.

Oops, maybe you should re-read this part. If you don't
have a change of heart then tell us how many posts he'll
need before he can give his opinion.

mick · #52 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 02, 2002, 03:53pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref

...how many posts he'll
need before he can give his opinion.

Dan,
Yer right. Number of posts is not a measurement of anything except time lost.

mick

Dan_ref · #53 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 02, 2002, 04:00pm

Quote:

Originally posted by mick

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref

...how many posts he'll
need before he can give his opinion.

Dan,
Yer right. Number of posts is not a measurement of anything except time lost.
mick

The time is gone regardless of how we spend it. Wasted...
now that's something else!

crew · #54 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 02, 2002, 10:25pm

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Dexter

Quote:

BTW, I'd advise you to get a few more than three posts under your belt before you come on here and start criticising everyone in sight.

mark dexter,
what does # of posts have to do with having an opinion on a subject. for all you know bbarnaky could be a great official whom has just found this board. btw, just because people post on this board does not qualify anyone for anything(i.e. being a good official). that includes YOU and MYSELF as well. any loser can type on this board as well as any great person.

Mark Dexter · #55 (**permalink**) Wed Jan 02, 2002, 11:20pm

Quote:

Originally posted by crew
mark dexter,
what does # of posts have to do with having an opinion on a subject. for all you know bbarnaky could be a great official whom has just found this board. btw, just because people post on this board does not qualify anyone for anything(i.e. being a good official). that includes YOU and MYSELF as well. any loser can type on this board as well as any great person.

First of all, it's you and me, not you and myself. (Sorry, I'm on a grammar crusade tonight.)

I probably came across the wrong way. Definately # of posts does not relate to ability - we all started at 1, and I'm only a rec ball official/real ball timer with six hundred something posts. When I first read BBarnaky's post this morning, I inferred it to mean "we need good officials, and you people are not good officials." Incorrect interpretation? Maybe, but (like opinions on calls) it was what I inferred at the time.

BktBallRef · #56 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 03, 2002, 12:50am

Quote:

Originally posted by crew
what does # of posts have to do with having an opinion on a subject. for all you know bbarnaky could be a great official whom has just found this board. btw, just because people post on this board does not qualify anyone for anything(i.e. being a good official). that includes YOU and MYSELF as well. any loser can type on this board as well as any great person.

No, the number of posts is not an issue with regards to a person's right to voice their opinion. However, on a discussion board such as this, you gain credibility with other posters based on the knowledge and information you're able to pass on. Those who jump in feet first and start criticizing the posts of those who are respected on a particular board, are usually not well received.

Although he didn't say it well, I believe that's what Mr. Dexter was trying to convey.

crew · #57 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 03, 2002, 02:18am

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Dexter
[B]

Quote:

[QUOTEFirst of all, it's you and me, not you and myself. (Sorry, I'm on a grammar crusade tonight.)

you mean "you and i"

rainmaker · #58 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 03, 2002, 02:28am

[QUOTE]Originally posted by crew
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Dexter

Quote:

Quote:

First of all, it's you and me, not you and myself. (Sorry, I'm on a grammar crusade tonight.)

you mean "you and i"

Sorry, crew, but this time it's not a matter of opinion -- grammar rules are not nearly as flexible as a ref's "judgment". When using pronouns in combination (such as the situation Mark refers to above) you use the same pronouns you would use if they were used singly. Original quote was, "...and that includes you and myself as well." If you were to use a single pronoun in that sentence, it would correctly read, "...and that includes me as well." When you add in the second pronoun you still use, "me" , so... " ...and that includes you and me as well."

There are a very few on this board who adhere strictly in their posts to proper grammatical structure, and Mark Dexter is one of them. I'm wondering if that shouldn't give him at least a little added credibility!?!? Especially when he uses "inferred" and "myriad" properly. And even spelled correctly. Wow!! Way to go, M.D.

[Edited by rainmaker on Jan 3rd, 2002 at 01:32 AM]

Mark Dexter · #59 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 03, 2002, 09:46am

Thanks, Juulie.

The easiest way to remember "(you/she/her/his/George) and (me/myself/I/etc.)" situations is just to remove the other person from the equation.

I remember saying at an assembly in front of the entire school "If you want to buy prom tickets, see Lynn or myself." I got such an earful from my English teacher that I now rarely get this one wrong

.

mick · #60 (**permalink**) Thu Jan 03, 2002, 10:13am

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
Thanks, Juulie.

The easiest way to remember "(you/she/her/his/George) and (me/myself/I/etc.)" situations is just to remove the other person from the equation.

I remember saying at an assembly in front of the entire school "If you want to buy prom tickets, see Lynn or myself." I got such an earful from my English teacher that I now rarely get this one wrong .

Did Lynn find someone else herself?