Official mechanics
 

I see alot of refs using a chopping motion with arms crossed when signaling a foul to the table. Is this considered a hit, please clarify. What exactly is a hit?

"Hit" is not a term used in NFHS.

The chopping motion, according to the Officials Manual, should be done with closed fists and indicates illegal use of hands.

I agree this is illegal use of hands. When reporting I simplify it by calling it a "Hack" and signaling the illegal use of hands signal.

I don't call it anything. :D

Really? u dont verbally report what u are signaling?? r u kiddin w/me:confused:

The NFHS mechanics (and, iirc the NCAA mechanics) both say to signal (not verbalize) the type of foul.

That's exactly what we train our officials to do too. Talking is extraneous if a signal is given.

I verbalize "Blue 42" then give the signal. Sometimes I do a bit more in a situation where there may be confusion on what was called. An example might be where a player is pushed prior to going up with a shot, then contacted again while shooting.

I may say, "Blue 42, push before the shot" while giving the mechanic for a push. But that's only in a situation where the table seems to be confused as well as a coach. If a coach wants an explanation, he can ask me as I'll be tableside after reporting.

I used to not advocate saying anything when giving signals. In the last couple of years I have changed that opinion. Now I tell a story of what happen. I do not say "hit" or "hack." I say what they hit and what they hit it with. For example, "He hit him in the head with his right arm." I am amazed how I do not get any questions to what I called from coaches and why it was called.

Peace

In some cases I too will do this...when you can nail down the detail, what CAN they say?! ;)

That is interesting to hear from so many. I truely thought one was supposed to signal (for coaches, fans and table to see) and simulataneously verbalize the signal to the table for clarity. It seems logical to me; but what do i know :) Of course the table doesnt care what kind of foul anyway (other than T); just color and number and add to the count I suppose.

If you do not verbalize the foul when reporting to the table, I believe you are missing a good opportunity to communicate to the coaches what actually happened. As was said before by Splute, the table doesn't care what kind of foul - your signal and words are really for the benefit of the coaches.

In the college mechanic of calling official goes opposite, this is certainly more important than before because you can't take the time to stay table-side to explain nor can you reasonably carry on a conversation across the court.

The preliminary signal at the spot of the foul is less important (in most instances) than the signal and communication you give at/to the table.

I came into reffing with apparently a nasty habit of reporting to the table and saying, "I've got, blue 4/2 with a (insert foul here)......." Never even realized I was doing it. After being critiqued twice by senior evaluators - "You ain't got anything", I learned to just say color, number and then signal...... it was good advice for me.

We're trained to say color, number and give the signal. No verbalizing the foul. If the coach needs a clarification he can ask. 99% of the time, they don't ask.

I already spoke up in another thread recently about this and I agree with Jurassic...

Talking can get you in to trouble. There is nothing in the fed mechanics that states any verbalization should be given when reporting. Your reporting to the table, not the coaches.

Also, RNGRCK, and I don't mean any disrespect, but it seems several of the questions you have been posting could be clearly answered by referencing the FED rule and mechanics manuals. If you are officiating games, it would probably be worth the while to read through them for these basic concepts.

Well, I'd say that maybe 99% of the questions asked on this site could be looked up in the rule or case book, and probably should, but I enjoy this site to read those Q's, hear the veterans explanations or examples of what happened to them, read the small disagreements among us, and ultimately learn from these questions- to be a better official.
Many times these posts go in depth which helps explain the rules more then the (sometimes) brief wording in the books.
All officials know that they should constantly read said books, but it can be a hindrence if one asks a Q, and expecting a "veteran" to answer "look in the book". You could probably give an intelligent response in the time it took to type a flippant one. Our profession catches enough grief as it is. Help by mentoring on a small scale.
Ben Franklin said it best "We must all hang together, or we will surely hang separately".
And I mean no disrespect.

And that is why i stated that I meant no disrespect. But it is my opinion that an official who is working games should know what the mechanic is for illegal use of hands. The OP was stating that he was seeing officials using the FED prescribed mechanic for illegal use of hands and the OP didn't know what they were doing.

I was just putting it out there that officials should at least know the basics, and that includes the proper mechanics.

there is also nothing in rule or CB that states you should not verbalize when reporting - regardless of who you are reporting to. One might argue - "don't read into it so much" or "don't add your own interpretation to the rules" but since it doesn't say either way whether to verbalize or not it's just left up to each officials "judgement" I guess. ;) Go with whatever gives you a real warm fuzzy!

I don't have the mechanics book with me, but last ime I looked (about 6 years ago), it stated something like:

1) State the uniform color
2) State and signal the number
3) Signal the type of foul
4) State and point to the inbound spot, or state and indicate the number of FTs

It *was* clear that the foul type was to be given without verbalization.

I don't have a mechanics book from 6 years ago BUT when you state the uniform color (which we are not supposed do anymore where I work) and you state and signal the color - you are already "verbalizing". ;) :D

1) How do you indicate which team fouled if you don't state the color?

2) The issue isn't about all statements; it's specificallly about stating the foul type (e.g, do you say "hit" when giving the ilelgaluse of hands signal?) IOW, should my step 3 above be "signal the type of foul" (as I wrote) or "state and signal the type of foul" (as others seem to do). I know what it used to be; I know what it is here; I don't know what the "official" FED mechanic is.

1.We are told to just point to the team bench area
2. This is why I didn't totally disagree with you - in my area we have been told to verbalize the signal while we give it. However we are supposed to verbalize "correctly" ie a push not "over the back" etc. I have heard that this is done to help "educate" people in proper terminology to help get rid of misconceptions etc. Personal experience would indicate it has not been helping in this regard very much.

When in doubt, do it by the book. Coaches won't question the call if you give strong signals at the table anymore than if you verbalize "the story" there. I've seen lots of officials get themselves in trouble by verbalizing too much.

Unless you're in Illinois, or Texas, or New York, or. . . :D

Not everyone in your state points the the bench. This must be an association thing. Our association strongly frowns on it.

You can add Louisiana and North Dakota too. I know there are a couple of other examples, but you get the idea.

Peace

Tis why I said, "when in doubt." :D