Please help clarify - 'half step' rule

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Dan_ref, I mean this with no malice, but that is complete BS. Go back and read your own post #38. You directly quote BNR's 1-on-0 scenario. So you referenced the breakaway and that's what I said I would likely pass on. That's what I've been discussing this whole time.

I guess it's true that the first thing to go when you get old is. . . Um. . . What's the first thing to go, again?

OK. Discussion reframed.

So pls explain why you're passing on an obvious violation leading to 2 undeserved points if it's not in your primary?

TIA.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

OK. Discussion reframed.

Only by you. This is a lame comment.

So pls explain why you're passing on an obvious violation leading to 2 undeserved points if it's not in your primary?

Good lord, you must be really busy this morning, because you don't even read previous discussion before making this kind of comment. You didn't read your own post before saying that you never referenced a 1-on-0 fast break and you obviously didn't read this comment that I typed on the previous page:

And being a Presidential election year, I made sure to say that I "might" not make it from the C. If it's an obvious travel from the 3-point line (like Jurassic mentioned in another thread), then I would think somebody would have to make it, even if it makes the primary official look bad.

I'm done with this stupid "conversation". Wow.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Only by you. This is a lame comment.

Good lord, you must be really busy this morning, because you don't even read previous discussion before making this kind of comment. You didn't read your own post before saying that you never referenced a 1-on-0 fast break and you obviously didn't read this comment that I typed on the previous page:


I'm done with this stupid "conversation". Wow.

Sure, if I was changing my story I would want to be done with it too.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

So pls explain why you're passing on an obvious violation leading to 2 undeserved points if it's not in your primary?

Dan, if it's a 1-on-0 fast break and the lead obviously has nothing else to look at and he passes on it are you saying you would come in from the 'C' or 'T' and grab the call?

Me, I guess it would depend whom I'm working with. A newbie official, I come get it. A veteran official, I let him/her explain why there was no whistle.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Dan, if it's a 1-on-0 fast break and the lead obviously has nothing else to look at and he passes on it are you saying you would come in from the 'C' or 'T' and grab the call?

Me, I guess it would depend whom I'm working with. A newbie official, I come get it. A veteran official, I let him/her explain why there was no whistle.

I guess that's where we differ.

Whether or not I take this call does not depend on the skill of the guy who missed it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Do you think it's an accident that those obvious travels aren't being called?

That's the whole point. I don't think it's an accident. I think many violations are obviously being deliberately ignored. Like somebody said, if it's not gonna get called, change the rule.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by just another ref

That's the whole point. I don't think it's an accident. I think many violations are obviously being deliberately ignored...

We're in agreement here.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Dan, if it's a 1-on-0 fast break and the lead obviously has nothing else to look at and he passes on it are you saying you would come in from the 'C' or 'T' and grab the call?

Me, I guess it would depend whom I'm working with. A newbie official, I come get it. A veteran official, I let him/her explain why there was no whistle.

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I guess that's where we differ.

Whether or not I take this call does not depend on the skill of the guy who missed it.

Seeing Tomegun signed on the site reminded me about this scenario. Guess a good question would be: If there is a 1-on-0 fastbreak why would the C or T be looking at A1? Shouldn't they have their eyes on the 9 players lingering behind the play?

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Seeing Tomegun signed on the site reminded me about this scenario. Guess a good question would be: If there is a 1-on-0 fastbreak why would the C or T be looking at A1? Shouldn't they have their eyes on the 9 players lingering behind the play?

The T monitors the lagging players. The C does what he needs to do - follow the play in or stay back, depending on what the next wave is doing.

The original good question was why would you take a call based on the seniority of your partner?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

The T monitors the lagging players. The C does what he needs to do - follow the play in or stay back, depending on what the next wave is doing.

The original good question was why would you take a call based on the seniority of your partner?

B/c as the C or T I would not be looking too hard at A1 in this situation. But if I were working with a newbie or rookie and they missed something obvious I would be more inclined to come and get it to save them the fallout from a coach that might ensue.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

B/c as the C or T I would not be looking too hard at A1 in this situation. But if I were working with a newbie or rookie and they missed something obvious I would be more inclined to come and get it to save them the fallout from a coach that might ensue.

Sorry if I'm being a little dense, but you're not looking at the play but you'll take a travel to keep a coach from b1tching to a rookie? Is this what you're saying?

How does this make sense?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Sorry if I'm being a little dense, but you're not looking at the play but you'll take a travel to keep a coach from b1tching to a rookie? Is this what you're saying?

How does this make sense?

If I'm working with a rookie I'm more inclined to be looking outside my primary.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

If I'm working with a rookie I'm more inclined to be looking outside my primary.

Not sure I agree with this at all as a general statement.

Abyway... if working with a rookie you follow the 1-0 break away? Or you hang back?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Not sure I agree with this at all as a general statement.

Abyway... if working with a rookie you follow the 1-0 break away? Or you hang back?

As the 'C' I would see no reason to go past half court.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

As the 'C' I would see no reason to go past half court.

So you're calling a travel on a 1-0 break away from HC as C?

Would you do this even if the travel occurs on the lead's side of the court?