Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
 

I did notice your brief posting and was in SHOCK! :D

Nice call!

i report the nature of the foul. trip. a block signal does not explain the nature foul very well. like when a defender hits the shooter in the head trying to block the shot, illegal use of the hands is the nf/nc2a book signal. i will still imitate the foul with my signal.

I've definately noticed that the NCAA guys don't stick to the six signals.

Is that something your assignors/supervisors tell you to do?

they ask us to report "what happens." i look at the rule book signals as a guide line for mechanics. reporting a "hit to the head" or "trip" creates less confusion. sometimes when using the book mech. that does not describe what actually happened (i.e. illegal use of hands as opposed to hit to the head) can cause a coach to question your call. creating our own signals adds a little personality to our officiating, just dont go to the extreme.

i have been questioned by "pure" high school officials by by the trip mech. and whatnot. they say it is not in the rule book. try not to get too technical with the rule book, a good official is not determined by where he stands in a timeout, or how textbook his mechanics are. how you present yourself in the game and how smooth your mechanics are-are better representative than how text book your mechanics are.

Tony, I'm going to stick with what I said before.

The college mechanics are great for college games. I actually prefer the demonstrative signals (as long as it's not too complicated/showy) as they do help eliminate a lot of confusion as to who did what to whom.

However, I believe that guys/gals working HS ball who want to do college ball should use HS mechanics (or the mechanics of their area) when doing their HS games. I think doing this shows you are a good official at your level and are able to move up and work another level.

tony, this is very true. But for the vast majority of us, good "by-the-book" mechanics are how we initially get noticed. If a guy's mechanics suck, the odds are overwhelming that an assignor will not give him a second look. If you want to get that second look, then your mechanics have to be "spot on", so to speak.

Now, once you get that second look, you better be able to call a darn good game. No question. And that's where I totally agree with you about being smooth and making the right calls. Mechanics do not make the official. But without the good mechanics, most of us will never get to find out how good we can be.

Chuck

I agree with you Mark, in fact the NCAA/CAA signals are, get this, the same as the NFHS plus a few additions (read pat the top of your head for a shot clock violation, this is the same as the NBA/WNBA signal). When a player gets tripped in a high school or college game it is a block by rule (see Rule 4: Definitions). An "over the back" (oh how I hated to say the phrase because I do not use it) is pushing. When B1 hits A1 in the head during a field goal attempt this is illegal use of the hands.

Just because the coaches do not know the rules or know what the signals are is no excuse for officials (high school or college) to lower their performance standards.

if the leg is extended, it is a block! extended meaning, if the leg a lot more than shoulder with out, it is a block, it is a judgement call to a point!

Absolutely Doug - you gotta judge it to be an excessive extension first - can't do that from here! I would go with if the defender looks like they have a natural stance, its a no-call.

Coach, exactly what is an excessive extention versus an extension? The rulebook simpy says "extends."

BTW, you ask about vocalizing when your reporting. I don't. That gives the coach one less thing to argue about. :)

"Blue, 44" Block signal. No verbalization.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jan 19th, 2002 at 12:36 AM]

Eye of the beholder, and I think you recognize it if you see it. I think that shoulder width precisely is a very rare stance, but far greater than shoulder width is also a rare stance. IMO, a defender in a stance that appears natural (i.e., does not look like he is assuming a wide stance as you see it) should not be penalized for standing while another player trips over his foot. In my experience, this is generally considered incidental contact. It's up to you to see what you see, and call what you must. If the stance looks wide to you, I am willing to bet the feet are greater than shoulder width apart so call it if you see it that way.

In the end, fouls are strictly judgment, I'm just giving some guidance on that judgment.

Rarely does a defender who's trying to take a "wide" stance leave his/her legs straight. Almost always a knee gets extended, or the hips get shifted.

TH
 

I have adopted the non-verbalized reporting (based on your, and others', suggestiopn) and I have noticed it DOES reduce the amount of Howler Monkey remarks.

Thanks for the advice! :)

Check 4-23-1, a player who extends a leg does not have legal guarding position (LGP) when contact occurs.

Re: TH
 

Good deal! Glad it's working for you! :)