While you're absolutely right, let me ask you this: A1 has the ball for a throw-in after a violation (so the clock is stopped), then B2 fouls A2 in-bounds. Do you put the fist up for the foul to stop the clock, even though the clock is already stopped?

<font size=1>Don't mind me, I'm just trying to stir the pot a little.</font size>

yes you put a fist up because you have a live ball situation. Note in my post early I said "stopped clock" and "dead ball".

In your situation, players are running around and making a play even though the clock is stopped because the ball is "live".

Yep, you've got a valid point. And looking at the latest signal chart, there is no combining of signals specified. I don't have my officials manual with me. I'm going to look this up tonight. Maybe another subtle, and perfectly reasonable, change I missed. :o

Again, I agree with you, but my point was in the book the signal is officially, "Stop clock for foul", not "Kill a live play and make the ball dead whether or not the clock is running because a foul occured" signal. ;) Perhaps way back in MTD, Sr's day, it was done slightly differently. But today it has evolved somewhat and is accepted that the fist is the signal for a foul, where the clock happens to stop, (if it's not already stopped), instead of the fist being the signal for the clock to stop, where there happens to be a foul. Subtle difference, perhaps? Perhaps the T has "evolved" to become a signal on it's own, rather than a type of foul, like a push or block.

I don't think anyone bats an eye anywhere in this country when an official gives the T signal without "stopping the clock" first, because it has become accepted practice. I personally like that method, because it takes a little bit of the "confrontation" out of the mechanic. Can you imagine blowing the whistle, putting your fist in the air, closing down hard on the player (or coach) while giving the optional bird-dog signal, then giving a good, hard T signal, just like you would on a close block/charge call? :D

Yes, but if he mouths off to me I just STICK HIM!

If the clock is stopped, why are we signaling to stop the clock?
 

Good point. Sometimes we don't even have give the "T" signal, like when a player's name, and number, is added to the scorebook after the ten minute mark.

You should give the T signal for this infraction while in the lane prior to administering the FTs. That makes it clear to everyone what is going on.

Why Are They Starting The Game With Foul Shots ???
 

Agree.

Called varsity games tonight with this same partner and another guy. Turns out this mechanic was stressed to them by an evaluator who was checking to see if our association had anyone qualified to call in the state tournament. Ironically, tonight this mechanic caused a problem with the arrow. Partner has the open hand, often followed by a dramatic(?) pause. The table thought he had called a violation, did not see the held ball signal, did not change the arrow.

I found the book. It is the 2006 NFHS Rules by Topic. On page 128 the topic is "Held Ball Violation". I'm not sure why the rule book and the Rules by Topic book disagree on whether a held ball is a violation or not.

Editorial mistake.

Agree that it is not the correct mechanic, but I would like to see them go to an open palm before the thumbs up. I go straight to the thumbs b/c it is the correct mechanic, but had a partner last year try to sell me on the palm first and it makes a lot of sense. If you have a scrum and two officials go flying in, if one has an open palm about to grant a time-out and the other has two thumbs, then you have an issue that the whole gym knows about...if on the other hand two officials go flying in, both go to the palm first, but one has a jump ball (and has not yet given the thumbs) and the other has a time-out, then you can get together to discuss what you have without it being obvious to everyone that the two of you had something different...like I said I don't it for the sake of the prescribed mechanic, but it makes a lot of sense..

One of the books is THE book, published by the rules-making body. The other book is A book, written about THE book, published by another company who is not the rules-making body.

Perhaps that doesn't answer the question of why they differ, but I think it does make it clear which is right. ;)

The Rules by Topic book is copyrighted by the NFHS. It says it is published jointly by the NFHS, REI, and NASO. I understand that the rule book is only published by the NFHS, but I do not think the book being jointly published makes it less official. Personally I believe that the held ball should not have been listed under violations in the Rules by Topic book. My book is 2 years old, I wonder if anything has changed in the 2007 or 2008 books.

________________________________

And more precisely, when in Illinois do as the IHSA says!:)