QF1Y: Travelling Violation? --- With Video Goodness

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by ca_rumperee

I had my wife videotape one of my games, so I could see things like my posture and 'presence' on the court.

Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.

You beat me to it.

For style points, don't have your arms dragging at your sides.

[INUmp]

imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by INUmp

imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.

Disagree 100%. What if the timer fails to start the clock?
Always count. It provides definite knowledge for correcting a timing error.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by INUmp

imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.

Disagree completely. It's terrible officiating. If the clock isn't started properly, what "definite information" do you now have available to fix the screw-up?

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by INUmp

imo it is good officiating to not have a ten second count going here when it is impossible to have a ten second violation.

shows, to me, that you are into the game and understand the situation/what is going on.

The way I see it, the only argument against this approach is say there is a count started when there is less than 10 seconds on the clock. Specifically, say 9.8s is on the clock.

Let's also say that you (or said official) is very consistent in their 10-second counts. IOW, they have already called 4 this game (or even 1 or more than 4), and I'll even say that they've called 2 on each team. In each case, the actual amount of time allowed for the ball to earn FC status before a violation was called was less than 10s, and around 9.1s. IOW, the covering official actually has a fast count.

In this case, the "5th" case, if you do not continue to "chop" 10-seconds as you have been doing, and call that same violation at 9.1s, then you are not being consistent, and IMHO, doing a disservice to the game.

No, I do understand that no two times will be exact, but it's important that they be consistent. If a 10-second count occurs earlier in the game with clearly only 9 seconds coming off the clock, then when 9.9s is on the clock, and you don't have a 10s violation, IMHO, the coach has reason to wonder about your consistency.

Edit: another argument is for definite knowledge of timing errors.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

The way I see it, the only argument against this approach is say there is a count started when there is less than 10 seconds on the clock. Specifically, say 9.8s is on the clock.

Let's also say that you (or said official) is very consistent in their 10-second counts. IOW, they have already called 4 this game (or even 1 or more than 4), and I'll even say that they've called 2 on each team. In each case, the actual amount of time allowed for the ball to earn FC status before a violation was called was less than 10s, and around 9.1s. IOW, the covering official actually has a fast count.

In this case, the "5th" case, if you do not continue to "chop" 10-seconds as you have been doing, and call that same violation at 9.1s, then you are not being consistent, and IMHO, doing a disservice to the game.

No, I do understand that no two times will be exact, but it's important that they be consistent. If a 10-second count occurs earlier in the game with clearly only 9 seconds coming off the clock, then when 9.9s is on the clock, and you don't have a 10s violation, IMHO, the coach has reason to wonder about your consistency.

Edit: another argument is for definite knowledge of timing errors.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.

Exactly, always have 10 second count going! It's very important if there happens to be a timing issue, especially in the last few seconds of a quarter.

[ca_rumperee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Use it to check your mechanics too.

1) You didn't have a ten second count going.

2) Ditch the "safe" signal.

Well, there were 4.5 seconds on the clock when inbounding, so I turned my 10 second clock off.

Safe signal is going on the shelf.

[BktBallRef]

I don't count when the BC count would start with less than 10 seconds on the clock. But I always look at the clock in such a situation so that I know that it's running.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I don't count when the BC count would start with less than 10 seconds on the clock. But I always look at the clock in such a situation so that I know that it's running.

I "count", but I don't *signal* the count. So, I still have "definite knowledge".

[daveg144]

I'd count ten seconds (even though there's less than 10 seconds left in game) just to be consistent and for possible timing issues.

One other thing, I'd get a little closer to the ball when coming up the floor. I feel it's best to only be a step or two behind the ball coming up the court.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I "count", but I don't *signal* the count. So, I still have "definite knowledge".

Concur...no real reason to have a "visible" count, but you should be counting for all the previously stated reasons.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Concur...no real reason to have a "visible" count, but you should be counting for all the previously stated reasons.

Mybe not for you, but I"m still working on my credibility and image. If I"m visibly counting, then if I need to use my definite knowledge, everyone knows it's definite, and not just something I made up (which I've been accused of). If someone were to think my visible count when there's less than 10 seconds left shows I'm not aware of the game situation, they'd soon see that's not the case as I was right on top of any situation that might occur.

[ref2coach]

When I am trail and the clock has less than 10 seconds showing, I count but I use the "wrist flick" instead of the "full arm" count.