Purposeful movement

So I keep hearing the phrase "move with a purpose". I thought that I understood what it meant, but I guess not because I'm still hearing it (from the same very helpful college official not multiple officials). It seems pretty self-explanatory but can anyone offer any examples?

When I'm L & the ball enters my PCA, I open up & mirror the ball... thoughts?

When I'm C & the ball is opposite, I generally take a few steps onto the court & up or down a couple steps from the FT line to get the best possible angle... thoughts?

When I'm T, I work the arc for the best possible angle (at about the 3 point line) I close down on shot attempts & make sure the defense has posession before transitioning to new L... thoughts?

After a foul is called, I hustle when switching. On dead balls I try to look alive. I don't know what else to do that will make my movements appear more purposeful.
I'll be working a couple of 3 person games with this same official tonight.

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated!

[cmathews]

He may be referring to the way in which you move when moving up or down a coupld steps, or working the arc. Not the actual reason you are moving. When you do make these moves make the sharp crisp and quick, don't "wander" down a couple steps. Make the movements very deliberate and sharp looking??? Maybe that is what he is talking about...jmho

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by cmathews

He may be referring to the way in which you move when moving up or down a coupld steps, or working the arc. Not the actual reason you are moving. When you do make these moves make the sharp crisp and quick, don't "wander" down a couple steps. Make the movements very deliberate and sharp looking??? Maybe that is what he is talking about...jmho

There are a couple of different thoughts here. Some ppl like quick sharp movements and some like smooth movement. It also depends on how you look. When I was first getting started I was moving all over the place. I was moving really sharply and quickly which exuded that I was trying to be very active but it also looked like I was trying to work my butt off just to get plays right. Smooth movements make it look like you've been there before and like you have done this time and time again, but at the same time if you come more near the low end of smooth movement you start to look lazy. So if you can just find that happy medium between knowing when you need to move quickly and sharply and when you can just smoothly transition then I think you will be better off. Good luck

Nevada,

Would you take a referee who could do both? Why settle for mediocrity? I want a guy who gets his plays right as well but if the coaches aren't buying what he's selling then you have problems as well. I know you say "who cares what the coaches think?" Well in college it means alot. If a supervisor wants a guy on a particular game and both coaches don't want the guy cause they aren't buying what he's selling, even though he is your best play caller, then the supervisor 9.9 times out of 10 will not put the ref on the game.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Nevada,

Would you take a referee who could do both? Why settle for mediocrity? I want a guy who gets his plays right as well but if the coaches aren't buying what he's selling then you have problems as well. I know you say "who cares what the coaches think?" Well in college it means alot. If a supervisor wants a guy on a particular game and both coaches don't want the guy cause they aren't buying what he's selling, even though he is your best play caller, then the supervisor 9.9 times out of 10 will not put the ref on the game.

I'm not interested in "both" because I would never look for "both" in an official. That's because I believe that one matters and one doesn't. Take Joey Crawford as an example. Do you think that he moves smoothly or crisply? How is his play calling?

I also believe that coaches respect officials based upon the decisions that they make, not on how they look or run. As long as the official is hustling, getting into position, and making decisions that are reasonable no college coach is going to have a huge problem. A coach gets upset when he believes that an official is missing calls due to being out of position or just making a poor decision against his team.

When I think about D1 refs who coaches seem to like, but that move oddly a few come to mind: Steve Welmer, Jim Burr, Ed Hightower, Dave Hall, and Mike Kitts. They seem to be scheduled on quite a few TV games.

You seem to be talking about that first look that a coach gets at an official with whom he doesn't have prior experience. The initial presentation can certainly lead to a bit of credibility, but after a few games the coaches get to know what the person calls and that becomes the focus. Coaches and supervisors don't care about how a ten-year veteran moves (unless he can't). What you are saying pertains to the first and second year folks trying to move up within a conference or someone at a camp trying to make an impression and get hired. It really has nothing to do with the quality of officiating. It is merely a way of getting a foot in the door.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm not interested in "both" because I would never look for "both" in an official. That's because I believe that one matters and one doesn't. Take Joey Crawford as an example. Do you think that he moves smoothly or crisply? How is his play calling?

I also believe that coaches respect officials based upon the decisions that they make, not on how they look or run. As long as the official is hustling, getting into position, and making decisions that are reasonable no college coach is going to have a huge problem. A coach gets upset when he believes that an official is missing calls due to being out of position or just making a poor decision against his team.

When I think about D1 refs who coaches seem to like, but that move oddly a few come to mind: Steve Welmer, Jim Burr, Ed Hightower, Dave Hall, and Mike Kitts. They seem to be scheduled on quite a few TV games.

You seem to be talking about that first look that a coach gets at an official with whom he doesn't have prior experience. The initial presentation can certainly lead to a bit of credibility, but after a few games the coaches get to know what the person calls and that becomes the focus. Coaches and supervisors don't care about how a ten-year veteran moves (unless he can't). What you are saying pertains to the first and second year folks trying to move up within a conference or someone at a camp trying to make an impression and get hired. It really has nothing to do with the quality of officiating. It is merely a way of getting a foot in the door.

First, Joey Crawford moves exactly as i stated earlier... with a purpose. He smoothly transitions to positions when he can and makes quick sharp movements when he has to get somewhere quick.

the reason why three of those D1 referees you mentioned get games night in and night out, imo, is that they are very good communicators, but also in my imo they are not good play callers what so ever.

I think you are underestimating the presence and look of an official, but then again that's jmo. I think having a referee who has the whole package is very important and looks are a part of that package.


I disagree with you that coaches want a guy who is in position to make the right call. They just want A call in their favor. coaches don't know what the "right position" is. 9 out of 10 coaches get pissed when a play goes to the hoop from T's primary and he makes the call at the basket when the defender is on the offensive player's inside hip and to US we know that the play is the T's play and that the L will not have such a good look at it, but they don't care they just think you are too far from the play to call that and that the guy closest to the play should make the call!

[Tio]

I think we need to make a distinction that what works for Joey Crawford doesn't necessarily work for us. Joe has earned the respect of coaches, players, and assignments. Honestly, I find all his hopping on the court annoying and if any of us transitioned like that we'd get called out on it. Crawford has earned the right to do it like that. He has nothing to prove to assignors or coaches as he is at the peak of the sport and his career.

With the speed of the players, we need to be anticipating the next play and move athletically and efficiently to call the play. Moving too much or too quickly reduces believability and attracts unnecessary attention to the crew.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Would you take a referee who could do both? Why settle for mediocrity? I want a guy who gets his plays right as well but if the coaches aren't buying what he's selling then you have problems as well. I know you say "who cares what the coaches think?" Well in college it means alot. If a supervisor wants a guy on a particular game and both coaches don't want the guy cause they aren't buying what he's selling, even though he is your best play caller, then the supervisor 9.9 times out of 10 will not put the ref on the game.

Disagree completely. College coaches could care less how officials get into position. All they care about is whether that official actually was in position when a call was needed to be made.

Until something on the court happens that they think requires a call, college coaches are watching the play, not the officials.

So I spoke with said official last night about his definition of purposeful movement & how it pertains to me.
It was a little bit of everything you all had stated in this thread (mainly sharp/crisp rotations & hustling to my new position after reporting fouls).

He said I did a much better job last night. I guess asking him exactly what he wanted from me was a good thing. I'll be attending some camps that he has already been to, so he's just trying to prepare me for what those camp directors are looking for in particular.

It's really inspiring when officials who have arrived reach back to assist those who are attempting to follow their path! Dude even provided me with CCA manuals to learn the rules/mechanics. When preparation meets opportunity one just might get lucky. I couldn't be more appreciative

[TwoDot]

When I was told this when learning the 3 man mechanics, it referred to moving quickly from point to point in a quick manner, but not running from point to point. For example when lead and moving across the lane, do so quickly and smoothly. Not walking or running but with purpose. Other points were the same but it was mostly on the Lead that that expression was used.

I'll try that tonight... crisp, quick, sharp position adjustments.

Thanks guys!

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

When I'm L & the ball enters my PCA, I open up & mirror the ball... thoughts?

This sounds good to me. I've been taught at camp, however, that the Lead should mirror the ball to a certain extent even when it's outside his/her PCA. If the ball is above the free throw line near the sideline, the Lead should be wide. Not on the sideline, but maybe almost to the 3-point arc. When the ball moves to the middle of the court, the Lead should mirror this movement and close down to the free throw lane line. This leaves less distance to move when it's time for the Lead to rotate (if necessary); and it tells the T and C that a rotation may be coming.

When I'm C & the ball is opposite, I generally take a few steps onto the court & up or down a couple steps from the FT line to get the best possible angle.

I think it's pretty rare for the C to need to move onto the court in this situation. If we're talking about a throw-in and you're trying to get an angle on a "stack" situation, ok, I can see that. But during routine play, I think you're better off staying on the sideline and adjusting up or down a step or two to officiate in the lane or on the far lane line. (You don't want to get too much farther than that anyway!)

The one time I will step onto the court as C is when there's a matchup with the ball near the free throw line right in front of me. Sometimes the ballhandler gets you straight-lined and moving a step up doesn't quite help enough. So I'll step onto the court, almost (but not quite) into a Trail position.

When I'm T, I work the arc for the best possible angle (at about the 3 point line) I close down on shot attempts & make sure the defense has posession before transitioning to new L...

Seems just about right.

Maybe this person is telling you that you're "wandering" too much? Instead of moving to look like you're doing something, he's thinking that you should hold a position a little longer until you really need to go somewhere to see the play? I'm totally guessing about that. I'm just trying to offer another angle.

Good luck with the game tonight. My one other comment would be to just ask the guy straight-out what he means. Be honest. "I think that I'm moving better, but you keep mentioning it, so I guess I'm just not understanding what I should do differently." He sounds like he wants to help, so I'm sure he'll be willing to give you more concrete examples.

Let us know what he says!

[refguy]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Maybe this person is telling you that you're "wandering" too much? Instead of moving to look like you're doing something, he's thinking that you should hold a position a little longer until you really need to go somewhere to see the play? I'm totally guessing about that. I'm just trying to offer another angle.

Good luck with the game tonight. My one other comment would be to just ask the guy straight-out what he means. Be honest. "I think that I'm moving better, but you keep mentioning it, so I guess I'm just not understanding what I should do differently." He sounds like he wants to help, so I'm sure he'll be willing to give you more concrete examples.
Let us know what he says!

This is what I have been learning. Don't be a robot with your movement, ie. if the ball goes here, I go there. If players are there, I go here; if a shot goes up, I step down to here. I have found that a lot of times staying where I am offers the best open look between players. Don't move just to appear active.
In fact I just got told that -- don't wander.

[Tio]

Purposeful movement means that we are only moving when we NEED to in order to maintain an open angle on our most competitive matchup. I think sometimes, we feel the need to move because we have been stationary too long. Try watching some of your game tapes and see if you can pick up what the evaluator means. Any unnecessary movement will be really obvious on tape.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Tio

Purposeful movement means that we are only moving when we NEED to in order to maintain an open angle on our most competitive matchup. I think sometimes, we feel the need to move because we have been stationary too long. Try watching some of your game tapes and see if you can pick up what the evaluator means. Any unnecessary movement will be really obvious on tape.

That makes sense. An official shouldn't be wandering around as if he is lost. One shouldn't appear to not know what he is doing.

However, I generally don't put much stock in little catch phrases and advice such as "move with a purpose." I tend to discount this kind of evaluation of an official because it is really cosmetic and doesn't make any impact upon whether or not an official makes the proper call. As long as an official reaches the proper position to see the play, why should it matter how he looks while getting there?

I'll take an official who makes good calls over one who looks good any day.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That makes sense. An official shouldn't be wandering around as if he is lost. One shouldn't appear to not know what he is doing.

This reminds me about what our previous interpreter use to tell new offcials who didn't quite know exactly what to do during time outs, or intermissions. His instructions to these confused rookies, "During a timeout, find a line somewhere, stand on it, and don't move".