2-man To question...

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Please point me to where I may find in the mechanics manual the above procedure for time-outs.

It's not in the manual. Whoever administers the time-out, calls the timeout, point to the throw-in spot and goes to the division line while the other official continues to observe the floor while retrieving the ball and going to the spot of the throw in. I think back in the day when you were able to hand off a time-out you can do it the way Cameron describes. It just doesn't make much sense to go from the endline to report the timeout, then let the coach know if it's his last timeout (as written in the procedure) then go back to the throw-in spot, while your partner is standing in the trail position watching you report then watch you go back and retrieve the ball and go to your old spot so he can take a few steps and take his spot at the division line. I've just always done it this way in 2-man.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

It's not in the manual. Whoever administers the time-out, calls the timeout, point to the throw-in spot and goes to the division line while the other official continues to observe the floor while retrieving the ball and going to the spot of the throw in.

Again, this is not the correct procedure. It may be what is done locally, but it is not the NFHS procedure....at least not what it used to be before the method used the last few years and, supposedly, what they're returning to.

Whoever doesn't call the timeout does retrieve the ball and heads to their spot while observing the players. If that person is going to the throwin spot, they keep the ball, if not, they bounce it to their partner (as they head to the throwin spot) when they finish the timeout report.

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

I think back in the day when you were able to hand off a time-out you can do it the way Cameron describes. It just doesn't make much sense to go from the endline to report the timeout, then let the coach know if it's his last timeout (as written in the procedure) then go back to the throw-in spot, while your partner is standing in the trail position watching you report then watch you go back and retrieve the ball and go to your old spot so he can take a few steps and take his spot at the division line.

Whether you think is makes sense or not doesn't make it wrong. I could come of with additional examples that use your method that have one official standing and the other walking around.

Originally Posted by JoeTheRef

I've just always done it this way in 2-man.

The longer you do something wrong doesn't make it right!

[Adam]

Cameron, I'm questioning whether this is an "official" NFHS procedure, or whether it's something that's regionally interpreted from the NFHS procedure. It may well be a nearly ubiquitous intepretation, is it (has it been) "official?"

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Cameron, I'm questioning whether this is an "official" NFHS procedure, or whether it's something that's regionally interpreted from the NFHS procedure. It may well be a nearly ubiquitous intepretation, is it (has it been) "official?"

As already illustrated in this thread, different areas seem to use slightly different mechanics. Until Camron can point out exactly where we can find the definitive FED backing for his particular interpretation, methinks I'd have to say that everybody is right as long as they are following the rest of the TO procedures as put out this year in the page that I linked.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Whoever doesn't call the timeout does retrieve the ball and heads to their spot while observing the players. If that person is going to the throwin spot, they keep the ball, if not, they bounce it to their partner (as they head to the throwin spot) when they finish the timeout report.

What about freezing field of vision and retrieving ball after partner has completed his report?
Is that gone in the new mechanics?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by mick

What about freezing field of vision and retrieving ball after partner has completed his report?
Is that gone in the new mechanics?

I didn't detail the "timing" of the actions...of course we must observe the players until they've cleared the floor and there is no longer a risk of something happening.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Whoever doesn't call the timeout does retrieve the ball

Mick sort of beat me to this, but if the ball is not within one or two steps of where you are, DO NOT CHASE THE BALL. Please. The ball will come back eventually, even if you have to ask someone to help you out.

This is probably not quite as important when reporting a time-out, because the players are heading to their benches. But if you're reporting the time-out and I'm bending over to pick up the ball, who's watching the players as they move to the benches?

[JoeTheRef]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The longer you do something wrong doesn't make it right!

Well in all honesty, I haven't done a 2-man NFHS game in about 4 seasons. When I do 2-person it's usually rec/off-season ball and seldom do we follow the mechanics to a tee. And I can almost assure you that I don't for a timeout mechanic, not when you're doing 3-4 games back to back.

[bob jenkins]

I don't grant TOs because they are just "game interrupters." Plus, I then don't have to worry about these mechanics, or notifying the coaches when they are out of TOs (I take care of it at the pre-game conference)

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't grant TOs because they are just "game interrupters."

Excellent game management tip! I'm going to borrow it, if you don't mind. Is this an NCAA philosophy or NFHS philosophy?

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't grant TOs because they are just "game interrupters." Plus, I then don't have to worry about these mechanics, or notifying the coaches when they are out of TOs (I take care of it at the pre-game conference)

Oh, oh, oh...I get it. That's sarcasm. See, I'm getting better at this type of thing...too bad it wasn't making fun of M&MGuy though...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Oh, oh, oh...I get it. That's sarcasm. See, I'm getting better at this type of thing...too bad it wasn't making fun of M&MGuy though...

He was, you just didn't recognize it.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Oh, oh, oh...I get it. That's sarcasm. See, I'm getting better at this type of thing...too bad it wasn't making fun of M&MGuy though...

Nothing goes over your head, does it?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Nothing goes over your head, does it?

Actually, everything does.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't grant TOs because they are just "game interrupters."

Half times are too. And don't get me started about free throws.