Held ball stop clock

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Working jr. high tonight with a veteran partner. He asked if I minded if he pointed out a thing or two he had seen me do wrong recently. I said go ahead. The problem was that I was giving the held ball signal without giving the open palm stop clock signal first. I said I thought that either was acceptable. He gave a condescending smile and said that my way was not acceptable, that there was no signal to stop the clock. I knew that the official NFHS signal had at one time said "stop clock for jump/held ball" but it was not something I had looked at recently. He went on to say that our association was going to discuss some things and try to be more uniform in calls as well as mechanics, and I said sure, who wouldn't be for that? Well, I check my new book and I see that the held ball signal still says stop clock just like always. My question is how this is done by others. Is the open palm first ok followed by a held ball signal, or is it considered overkill, or what?

Although trying to be helpful, I don't agree with the recommendation of your veteran partner. By widespread convention, the open palm signal is not just an indication to stop the clock, it conveys that the reason for doing so is that a violation has been committed. In the case of a held ball that is not true. Neither team has done anything wrong, so should the open palm signal be given?

Through 2003-04 the NFHS published a signal chart that was more step-by-step than the current one. For instance, it gave a box with signal #4 then a "+" followed by the graphics for the types of fouls (including a T). It did the same for violations by first showing giving signal #2 and then the type of violation signal.

Paradoxically, signal #2 was to accompany the sounding of the whistle and preceed the type of time-out signal when stopping the game for the granting of a time-out, but it was not listed as to be given along with the whistle and preceeding the signal for a held ball when stopping play for that. Why one and not the other? Neither are violations? Seems to me that it should be both or neither. My personal opinion is that the open palm should be used strictly for violations only. That way it conveys extra information to everyone. I happen to not use it for TOs. I just point at the individual requesting the time-out when blowing the whistle to grant it.

If your association is going to have a discussion on mechanics, you may wish to bring up those points.

PS What should we do when halting play for an injury?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Through 2003-04 the NFHS published a signal chart that was more step-by-step than the current one.


PS What should we do when halting play for an injury?

Follow the current chart. Use the fist to stop the clock for a foul. Use the thumbs to stop the clock for a held ball. Use the open hand to stop the clock in all other situations (injury, time out, violation).

Your (or someone's) assumption that the open hand means "violation" is not currently valid.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Uh, you forgot the 'T' formation!!!

Originally Posted by BillyMac

No I didn't, as Back In The Saddle has already stated, but I did forget another way to stop the clock; just allow the period to end, the horn will sound all by itself, so there's not need for a whistle, or a signal.

Which begs for a poll. How many officials use a fist before signaling a 'T'?

[jritchie]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Which begs for a poll. How many officials use a fist before signaling a 'T'?

Not me, like was said earlier, skip the fist and get straight to the good stuff

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Follow the current chart. Use the fist to stop the clock for a foul. Use the thumbs to stop the clock for a held ball. Use the open hand to stop the clock in all other situations (injury, time out, violation).

Your (or someone's) assumption that the open hand means "violation" is not currently valid.

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..

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Although trying to be helpful, I don't agree with the recommendation of your veteran partner. By widespread convention, the open palm signal is not just an indication to stop the clock, it conveys that the reason for doing so is that a violation has been committed. In the case of a held ball that is not true. Neither team has done anything wrong, so should the open palm signal be given?

First off fist up means stop clock for foul and open hand just means stop clock, not stop for violation. Secondly a held ball is a type of violation (I'm sure it says so in the Rules by Topic book, but not sure about the rule book.)

The only possible advantage of using the open hand up before signaling held ball is if another official is calling a foul. Hand up and fist up, get together and talk.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by LDUB

Secondly a held ball is a type of violation (I'm sure it says so in the Rules by Topic book, but not sure about the rule book.)

Violations are in Rule 9. Held ball isn't in Rule 9. Therefore, ...

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Violations are in Rule 9. Held ball isn't in Rule 9. Therefore, ...

Right you are. But the held ball is enumerated in NFHS 5-8: "Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official:
ART. 1 . . . Signals:
a. A foul.
b. A held ball.
c. A violation."

It would seem it exists as a separate entity, distinct from fouls and violations.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Which begs for a poll. How many officials use a fist before signaling a 'T'?

I don't.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

It would seem it exists as a separate entity, distinct from fouls and violations.

Yes -- that's my point.

LDUB (based on some book) has a different opinion.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Violations are in Rule 9. Held ball isn't in Rule 9. Therefore, ...

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Right you are. But the held ball is enumerated in NFHS 5-8: "Time-out occurs and the clock, if running, shall be stopped when an official:
ART. 1 . . . Signals:
a. A foul.
b. A held ball.
c. A violation."

It would seem it exists as a separate entity, distinct from fouls and violations.

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.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by LDUB

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.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by LDUB

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.

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.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

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.

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.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by LDUB

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.

That was the first year that the Rules by Topic was published. Not surprisingly, it contained a number of mistakes.
Unfortunately, this one wasn't fixed in the 2007-08 version. The same language appears on page 150.