How do you handle this situation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

I want to make sure of what I have read so far

Ball is at FT line extended... Was it above or below?

Doesn't matter. (assuming 2-man)

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

Ball goes out of bounds at lead's sideline
In games around here if it is above FT kine extended the sideline is trail's first shot...

We would be pregaming it... but it may be Trail's calll

The lead owns the entire sideline all the way to the backcourt endline. Lead has the whistle and the call unless they ask for help from the trail (which a wise lead will often do when it is above the FT line extended)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Assuming 2-man, the lead owns the entire sideline all the way to the backcourt endline. Lead has the whistle and the call unless they ask for help from the trail (which a wise lead will often do when it is above the FT line extended)

Unless your using IAABO mechanics. There is only one boundary line responsibility diagram in the manual. The lead has the nearest endline, and sideline below free throwline extended. The trail has the division line, all the backcourt, nearest endline, and farther sideline above free throw line extended. This diagram is listed as an option, but there is no other option offered, or described, in the manual.

My local IAABO board switched from NFHS mechanics to IAABO mechanics a few years ago. Our IAABO handbook no longer contains NFHS mechanics. It contains an IAABO directory, a NFHS rule book, a NFHS case book, and an IAABO mechanics manual.

I hate the IAABO mechanics. In many cases the manual suggests options that must be pregamed before every game to be sure that you and your partner are on the same page. There's even an option for a rotation when the trail moves across the basket line, the lead rotates to the other side. There's also an option to the old official-ball-official boxing in principle. It's like IAABO is using three man mechanics in a two man game. What was wrong with the old NFHS mechanics? They worked well for me for over twenty-plus years.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Unless your using IAABO mechanics. There is only one boundary line responsibility diagram in the manual. The lead has the nearest endline, and sideline below free throwline extended. The trail has the division line, all the backcourt, nearest endline, and farther sideline above free throw line extended. This diagram is listed as an option, but there is no other option offered, or described, in the manual.

My local IAABO board switched from NFHS mechanics to IAABO mechanics a few years ago. Our IAABO handbook no longer contains NFHS mechanics. It contains an IAABO directory, a NFHS rule book, a NFHS case book, and an IAABO mechanics manual.

I hate the IAABO mechanics. In many cases the manual suggests options that must be pregamed before every game to be sure that you and your partner are on the same page. There's even an option for a rotation when the trail moves across the basket line, the lead rotates to the other side. There's also an option to the old official-ball-official boxing in principle. It's like IAABO is using three man mechanics in a two man game. What was wrong with the old NFHS mechanics? They worked well for me for over twenty-plus years.

Billy:

I think you are confusing throw-in responsibility with out-of-bound violation coverage responsibility. The IAABO mechanics on pages 44 and 45 of the IAABO H.S. Handbook refer to throw-in resposibilities not out-of-bound violation converage repsonsibility. The mechanic on page 44 is an old NCAA Women's 2-man mechanic that I find to be a good mechanic but the mechanic on page 45 is the correct NFHS mechanic and is also an accepted IAABO mechanic.

I feel your pain when the bal does go out-of-bounds above the free throw line extended as on page 44 of the IAABO H.S. Handbook is a good example of situations that need to be pre-gamed. Out-of-bounds violations on that sideline are the responsibility of the L, but when the ball goes over in the area which you are concerned, the T has to have a patient whistle in case the L doesn't make a call, and needs to be ready to help the L if he does put air in his whistle. In those situations I, as the L, will know 99% of the time that the ball went out-of-bounds and that is all because of coverage in the paint, and I will put air in the whistle and then give the call up to the T because he will most likely have the best look at the play.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I think you are confusing throw-in responsibility with out-of-bound violation coverage responsibility. The IAABO mechanics on pages 44 and 45 of the IAABO H.S. Handbook refer to throw-in resposibilities not out-of-bound violation converage repsonsibility. MTD, Sr.

Mark T DeNucci, Sr.: I was actually referring to page 46 of the IAABO Manual, "OPTION: Line Coverage Above Free Throw Line Extended". I don't like this mechanic. In transition, i.e. fast break, press break; the lead should have the entire line, as he, or she, did with the old NFHS mechanics. As the lead, in a half court situation, using the old NFHS mechanics, I seldom had problems covering the entire line into the backcourt, and when I did, I would go to my partner for help. Worse case scenerio, alternating possession arrow. There are even worse scenerios with the page 46 mechanics, like difficult transition coverage. Also, if the ball goes out of bounds at the free throw line extended, we could have no whistle, or even worse, two whistles. With two whistles on fouls, or violations, in the "paint", we veterans have no problems delaying our preliminary signal until we make eye contact with our partner, thus avoiding the infamouis "blarge". But we veterans are also used to giving immediate signals on out of bounds calls, so in a worse case scenerio, using the mechanics on page 46, we could have one official calling "white" and the other official "blue". What really kills me, is that even tough it says "Option", there isn't any other boundary line coverage mentioned anywhere in the manual, either in diagram form, or a written description, which means that if a new official is told to use the manual, that's all he, or she, will learn.

Page 44 is fairly reasonable. Page 45, on the other hand, is poorly drawn and/or worded. Note that the caption doesn't mention the ball going out of bounds, while the diagram clearly shows a throwin situation. If you read the caption, it describes a rotation, similar the a three man rotation, but based on the movement of the trail, not the lead.

Check out page 49. The old official-ball-official boxing in principle was so, so easy to administer, and teach to new officials.

Why change. IAABO uses NFHS rules. Why can't we use NFHS mechanics?