Speaking of visible counts...

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Guys, Mick was not saying literally to not ever call a violation. I think he is saying to give them a true count and take your time. I think it is better to be a little slow than to be very quick on this call.

For the record, I call 5 second calls all the time. So I have no problem making a call like this. But I want that call to be made without being in a hurry.

Peace

Agree with you that the count should be true, but IMO being slow is just as bad as being fast, and you have far more officials who are slow than who are fast...some brutally slow...

[bigdog5142]

I count: one one thousand, two one thousand...in my head and my visible count follows that. I do have to admit that I sometimes count a bit slower in JH girls' games. After a rebound, I tend to forget the "one" and then start at two...I'm more focused on the rebound and possible fouls...then I focus on the 10 second count.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Agree with you that the count should be true, but IMO being slow is just as bad as being fast, and you have far more officials who are slow than who are fast...some brutally slow...

Many officials start the count before the thrower has the ball. My point is just wait a second or half a second then start your count. I do not know many people that have a stop watch to know if we are 100% accurate. I would much rather have a count at 6 seconds and 5 1/2 seconds than 4 seconds to call this violation.

Peace

[Splute]

good words of experience JRut. IMO, at the middle school level, we do not add anything to the game by STRICTLY enforcing 5-second counts to the exact second or non-contested (no press) 10-second counts. It is far more enjoyable to have a flow to your game rather than interupters at this level. I believe we are all on the same page here; use common sense for the game you are officiating.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Guys, Mick was not saying literally to not ever call a violation.

Rut - it wasn't Mick with whom we were disagreeing. In fact, we were agreeing with Mick that not making the call or fudging on it to avoid making the call is wrong. Check who said what again.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by kbilla

IMO being slow is just as bad as being fast, and you have far more officials who are slow than who are fast...some brutally slow...

JMO, but I disagree with this. I would rather be a little bit slow and perhaps miss a close violation than be a little too fast and call a violation that wasn't really there.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Splute

good words of experience JRut. IMO, at the middle school level, we do not add anything to the game by STRICTLY enforcing 5-second counts to the exact second or non-contested (no press) 10-second counts. It is far more enjoyable to have a flow to your game rather than interupters at this level. I believe we are all on the same page here; use common sense for the game you are officiating.

The best thing for lower grade (or any grade, for that matter) teams in a game is to have all the refs who work their games call them the same. That way they can concentrate on playing, not on the calls. If all the refs called all the games strictly according to the rules, the consistency of officiating would be at it's optimum and it would make it incredibly easy for teams. They would no longer have to "adjust" to any particular person or crew. If all of us agreed to modify a certain call a certain way and we all did that all the time, then that would become the "de facto" rule and it would work the same way for the team. But - the odds of that happening vs. the odds of calling the game by the rules is slim to none. That's why we should all call all the games according to the rules. It's the most logical conclusion and results in the highest level of consistency, which is best for everyone.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

JMO, but I disagree with this. I would rather be a little bit slow and perhaps miss a close violation than be a little too fast and call a violation that wasn't really there.

My point is don't be satisfied with either, being "a little slow" or "a little fast", it is something that should be practiced (along with the lost art of throwing a good jump ball)...nobody is a machine, nobody will ever get it perfect, but if you make a point to practice it (with a clock) you can get darn close....

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

JMO, but I disagree with this. I would rather be a little bit slow and perhaps miss a close violation than be a little too fast and call a violation that wasn't really there.

And the moral of the story is… be patient on the whistle!

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by kbilla

My point is don't be satisfied with either, being "a little slow" or "a little fast", it is something that should be practiced

That's cool. It's a good point. I was only addressing the part of your post that said "being slow is just as bad" as being fast. I personally think being slow is not just as bad. I think it's far worse to count too fast than to count too slowly.

[rainmaker]

So much depends on the game itself. In a close game where defense is really working hard, you start the count as soon as it's appropriate, count exactly to the clock, and call the violation right at 5 seconds. In a sloppy game where defense is just sort of standing around, or is clearly not taking things seriously, you slow down a little and see how it plays out. Where there's a fumble as the count might be starting, be a little slow, to be sure there's really possession. When the ball is being passed quickly from teammate to teammate, I might start the count in head right on time but not necessarily get my arm going until 2 or 2-1/2 seocnds. A lot of this stuff is somewhat variable.

But I will say this in answer to a previous question. On a throw-in, and in a very tight defense, I will often give a visible count at "0". I've been questioned about it before, and when I explained, it was appreciated. It means I give 6 (or 11) slashes instead of 5 or 10, but once a player or coach knows that's my way, it gives them a good solid basis for deciding what to do. They KNOW where they stand, and they like that.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I will often give a visible count at "0". I've been questioned about it before, and when I explained, it was appreciated. It means I give 6 (or 11) slashes instead of 5 or 10, but once a player or coach knows that's my way, it gives them a good solid basis for deciding what to do. They KNOW where they stand, and they like that.

I'm not sure I get how this works...as has been discussed here if it takes your arm 1 second to swing on each count then why do you need 6 or 11 swings?

[Splute]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

The best thing for lower grade (or any grade, for that matter) teams in a game is to have all the refs who work their games call them the same. That way they can concentrate on playing, not on the calls. If all the refs called all the games strictly according to the rules, the consistency of officiating would be at it's optimum and it would make it incredibly easy for teams. They would no longer have to "adjust" to any particular person or crew. If all of us agreed to modify a certain call a certain way and we all did that all the time, then that would become the "de facto" rule and it would work the same way for the team. But - the odds of that happening vs. the odds of calling the game by the rules is slim to none. That's why we should all call all the games according to the rules. It's the most logical conclusion and results in the highest level of consistency, which is best for everyone.

I do not disagree with you; however, as has been mentioned on this board many times, each state, each chapter, and each association has its own recommendations how we are to officiate these rules at what level. Which I believe are a direct result of coaching influence by school district. That said, there will always be inconsistency, even among those calling in the same association. As you mentioned, until everyone calls it by the rules there can be no consistency.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Splute

As you mentioned, until everyone calls it by the rules there can be no consistency.

Consistency is about everyone calling it the same or in a similar way. The rules do not necessarily have anything to do with that equation. Just because everyone calls handchecking does not mean you are being consistent.

The bottom line is you are not going to get everyone to call a 5 second count with the same accuracy of stop watch. Even those can be off by milliseconds.

Peace

Originally Posted by rainmaker

When the ball is being passed quickly from teammate to teammate, I might start the count in head right on time but not necessarily get my arm going until 2 or 2-1/2 seocnds. A lot of this stuff is somewhat variable.

But I will say this in answer to a previous question. On a throw-in, and in a very tight defense, I will often give a visible count at "0". I've been questioned about it before, and when I explained, it was appreciated. It means I give 6 (or 11) slashes instead of 5 or 10, but once a player or coach knows that's my way, it gives them a good solid basis for deciding what to do. They KNOW where they stand, and they like that.

Juulie, not to be picky, but wouldn't it make sense to start your visible count the same way for every situation?
I would think that by doing it differently in the same game it would cause more confusion for the coach and players and they wouldn't be sure where they stand as far as the count goes.