2-man To question...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mick

I wouldn't be afraid of doing it in Colorado.

I don't know. The thin air can do weird things to people.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

As unlikely as it might seem, OS is right this time.

The timeout positions have NOTHING to do with who calls/reports the timeout.

If the throwin will be administered on your line, you go to the spot whether you called the timeout or not (after reporting if you do call the timeout).

If the throwin will be administered on your partner's line, you go to the division line whether you called the timeout or not (after reporting if you do call the timeout).

Think of it as if a defensive violation occurs at the location of the ball at the time of the timeout. Whoever would have administered the throwin for the violation will also administer the timeout throwin and will also go to the spot. Who calls the timeout is NOT a factor.

Examples:

In all cases, whoever calls it reports it before going to their spot.

1. Ball in the backcourt when the timeout is called...trail administering
   • Trail will go to the spot.
   • Lead will go to the division line.
2. Ball in frontcourt such that the throwin will be on the endline or on the lead's sideline
   • Lead will go to the spot
   • Trail will go to the division line
3. Ball in frontcourt such that the throwin will be on the trail's sideline
   • Trail will go to the spot
   • Lead will go to the division line
4. Throwin due for team A due to a violation or foul...
   • Whoever was to adminster that throwin (after switching) will go to the spot
   • The other official will go to the division line
5. FT's to be taken after the timeout
   • New lead goes to the FT line
   • New trail goes to the division line

This is accurate, from what my memory tells me. I do remember hearing this interpretation being that of our provincial interpretor.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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

You posted it yourself....

http://www.nfhs.org/core/contentmana...erences_07.pdf

I just expanded it with examples for those that didn't understand it.

[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?"

[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?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by mick

Not supposed to ?
I'll force a switch if I feel like I've been in one position for too long.
Other times, I'll force a switch if I think my partner has been in one position [missing necessary contact fouls] for too long.

I really liked the way you guys iced me out of this one. That's okay, do what you feel is the right thing to do. Speaking of switching, maybe not so much that we are communicating too much with coaches, but going back across the table forces better rotation.

You heard it hear first folks.

Why do you think the NCAA Men's won't acccept or adopt NBA rotations? The NBA rotations are so much better in that it keeps the referee's into the flow, where you might feel you need to switch because of an inactive partner or you're been in a spot too long. Prior to this change and the women still have it, you could sit in the C slot for a long long time.

[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?

[mick]

Originally Posted by Old School

I really liked the way you guys iced me out of this one. That's okay, do what you feel is the right thing to do. Speaking of switching, maybe not so much that we are communicating too much with coaches, but going back across the table forces better rotation.

You heard it hear first folks.

Why do you think the NCAA Men's won't acccept or adopt NBA rotations? The NBA rotations are so much better in that it keeps the referee's into the flow, where you might feel you need to switch because of an inactive partner or you're been in a spot too long. Prior to this change and the women still have it, you could sit in the C slot for a long long time.

I don't understand what you are saying about *you guys* and about icing you out.
Do you care to elaborate?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by mick

I don't understand what you are saying about *you guys* and about icing you out.
Do you care to elaborate?

It's not a big deal, what's important is the topic under discussion, and i have always done it the way CR suggests.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You posted it yourself....

http://www.nfhs.org/core/contentmana...erences_07.pdf

I just expanded it with examples for those that didn't understand it.

Yes, I posted the link. However, nowhere on that page or in the Officials Manual am I able to find your instructions as written by yourself though. Again, where may I find something from the FED that agrees with your statement. Until you can come up with something, you sureasheck can put me in the group that can't understand it. That's because I can't find it.

[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.

[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?