Language at the spot of the foul.

[referee99]

Help a brother out.

At the spot of the foul:
"Block"
"Hold"
"Push"
All lovely single syllable words.
"Hand Check", which runs together quickly, rolls off the tongue very easily.

What language do you use for "Illegal Use of Hands"?

Just worked with a partner who used "Hit", which I didn't like 100%, but it works.

[Back In The Saddle]

"Red 22"
"Coming in baseline, John"

Unless it's a block/charge, bad screen, or perhaps a handcheck, I'm not vocalizing the nature of the foul at the spot.

[Kelvin green]

Although Ray and I disagree on which football team should have won yesterday... I agree with him 100 percent here... Less you say the better off you are..

BTW....HIt works well for me!

[Skarecrow]

Just curious...Why not just say nothing at the spot, use the Illegal use of hands signal immediately at the spot of foul? Then at the table, verbalize "Illegal use of the hands" while again giving the signal, when it sounds right and proper. I see nothing wrong with it. It is entirely correct and non-confusing...."Hit" is not in the books.....

[Back In The Saddle]

Look at it like this, the whole purpose of signaling and vocalizing is communication. 98% of the time the foul is obvious. So what are you actually communicating? Nothing that the players, coaches, fans don't already know.

The exceptions I listed:

• Block/charge, this is one time when you want to sell it, baby, sell it.
• Bad screen. This one is not obvious. Don't give everybody a chance to start wondering what happened.
• Hand check, again not always obvious what the foul is here.
• "Body!", one I forgot in my earlier post. On a drive to the basket, when everybody see's no contact "up top," I use this one to communicate that the contact was with the shooter's body.

One risk of "over communicating" is that everybody has an opinion on every call. If your prelim doesn't match their perception, you risk losing credibility. If the coach sees "hit" and you call "push", you've created a perception problem, even though you got the call right.

My philosophy, be a man of few words. And choose wisely when to use those words.

Just my $0.02.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Skarecrow

Just curious...Why not just say nothing at the spot, use the Illegal use of hands signal immediately at the spot of foul? Then at the table, verbalize "Illegal use of the hands" while again giving the signal, when it sounds right and proper. I see nothing wrong with it. It is entirely correct and non-confusing...."Hit" is not in the books.....

I don't every verbalize the type of foul. "Blue 42." Give the signal. Point to the spot/say "two shots"/whatever.

No need to verbalize the type of foul.

Edited to add - for a common, normal foul. I'll verbalize "illegal screen" or something not obvious.

[Back In The Saddle]

BTW, welcome to the board, Skarecrow. I see that you're from Layton. I'm from Heber and work out of Provo. Kelvin's another Utahn. There are a few more of us around here too.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by referee99

What language do you use for "Illegal Use of Hands"?

Like most of the others here, I wouldn't normally verbalize this one. If you must say something, I think I prefer "Hands!" to "Hit!"

[referee99]

All responses have been helpful.

I will endeavor to stay away from excess verbiage at the spot except when necessary for emphasis on the sell.

[Skarecrow]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

BTW, welcome to the board, Skarecrow. I see that you're from Layton. I'm from Heber and work out of Provo. Kelvin's another Utahn. There are a few more of us around here too.

Wonderful! I gathered that about Kelvin when I saw the UTE ROOT on another thread....glad to be here, and I really appreciate the input....

You are right on....less is better, and that was my point...say nothing at the spot (on the illegal use of hands foul) and only at the table clariy.....Thanks for the other input...

S

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by Skarecrow

Wonderful! I gathered that about Kelvin when I saw the UTE ROOT on another thread....glad to be here, and I really appreciate the input....

You are right on....less is better, and that was my point...say nothing at the spot (on the illegal use of hands foul) and only at the table clariy.....Thanks for the other input...

S

Hey Skarecrow noticed your signature line....we have a pretty good chess player from the great state of Nevada who hangs around here. I , on the hand hand, love the game but suck.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

If you must say something, I think I prefer "Hands!" to "Hit!"

I prefer "Hit". Want to fight about it? I get to hit you. You only get to hands me. I bet I win. Wanna bet?

[Camron Rust]

I use "Hands".

[Skarecrow]

Originally Posted by Chess Ref

Hey Skarecrow noticed your signature line....we have a pretty good chess player from the great state of Nevada who hangs around here. I , on the hand hand, love the game but suck.

yeah, a wonderful game....I am a B player, Club Strength, so no real visions of grandeur in my chess life.....

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Skarecrow

A wonderful game. I am a B player, Club Strength, so no real visions of grandeur in my chess life.

I actually lived the life of chess grandeur. I was the ninth grade Chess Club intermediate level champion back in 19^&. The title was a real chick magnet. I immediately retired, wanting to go out, on my own terms, at the top of my game. I didn't want to end up having to get an Icelandic passport.

Since we're all such great friends, and I know none of you would report me to the authorities, I was sandbagging the Chess Club. I really should have been playing in the high level tournament, but I knew that I couldn't compete with those kids. Golf is the gentleman's game, not chess, right?