calling it but dealing with the annoyances afterwards

mutantducky

I tend to call palming more than other refs but the good thing about it is usually it can stop players from doing another. On the advantage thing, I have called palming when a defender isn't even nearby so no I don't always go by the advantage because yeah that is asking for trouble. There might be a few cases which I let go though and I've told players in breaks after to watch that or I i will call it.
Sometimes when working with refs who don't call it can be trouble. we switch the trail spots I will call it just a minute after the player was doing the exact same thing when the other ref was at the trail. Fortunately, many times I've had coaches tell players yeah that was palming but then of course they will get on you for not calling what they see as violations. - just about every crossover or hesitation dribbles.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I have not called a three-second violation in forty years and I have only been officiating for 38 years, 😀.

But, seriously, I have found that I have called fewer 3-second violations in the last eighteen years or so because of how the game is now played than during the first twenty years that I have been officiating. I think that in today's motion offenses, a player who stands in the paint is a negative to his team's offense rather that a plus.

One should remember that the Tower Philosophy applies to contact foul situations and not violations BUT know when and when not to call a 3-second violations is a judgement that comes from experience. I really do not have a problem with young officials calling a 3-second violation strictly by the rules, because it is a learning experience. I know that when I was a young whippersnapper in the peach basket era, I was known to call my share of 3-second violations.

MTD, Sr.

shishstripes

I once discussed this same philosophy with a veteran official and their response was this:

"A violation should not be considered on an advantage/disadvantage basis. By ignoring the violation because the defense was not put at an disadvantage is taking a possession away from the defensive team putting them at a disadvantage."

Working at a tournament last year I told a player to move out of the key twice, still didn't budge, tweet, "I told you twice to move out of the key." Coach told the kid, "Even I heard him, listen to the refs while they are still talking to you."

Adam

shishstripes wrote
I once discussed this same philosophy with a veteran official and their response was this:

"A violation should not be considered on an advantage/disadvantage basis. By ignoring the violation because the defense was not put at an disadvantage is taking a possession away from the defensive team putting them at a disadvantage."

Working at a tournament last year I told a player to move out of the key twice, still didn't budge, tweet, "I told you twice to move out of the key." Coach told the kid, "Even I heard him, listen to the refs while they are still talking to you."

I haven't heard a high school coach ask for a three second call in two or three years. I just remembered the last one I called. Either early last season or the season before.

This season, I haven't even had to say much to the players; maybe three times all season. "Get out of the lane." I don't use a color or number, as it's obvious to the players who needs to get out of the lane.

LeeBallanfant

shishstripes wrote
I once discussed this same philosophy with a veteran official and their response was this:

"A violation should not be considered on an advantage/disadvantage basis. By ignoring the violation because the defense was not put at an disadvantage is taking a possession away from the defensive team putting them at a disadvantage."

Exactly my sentiments. If you start using advantage/disadavantage for violations, you logically end up ignoring a player who dribbles out of bounds in the backcourt without any pressure, because no disadvantage in that.

Adam

LeeBallanfant wrote
Exactly my sentiments. If you start using advantage/disadavantage for violations, you logically end up ignoring a player who dribbles out of bounds in the backcourt without any pressure, because no disadvantage in that.

Here's the deal with three seconds. If you call it strictly by the book every time someone so much as has a toe on the line, the only people you will make happy are the fans. You won't please the coaches, you won't please your assigner, and you won't be happy with your schedule of games.

At upper levels, it is expected to call it a little differently than "by the book."

Ignats75

LeeBallanfant wrote
Exactly my sentiments. If you start using advantage/disadavantage for violations, you logically end up ignoring a player who dribbles out of bounds in the backcourt without any pressure, because no disadvantage in that.

I hope you can use sufficient judgement to tell the difference between the OP and your example.:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

I have called exactly one 3 second violation this year. Its usually not even an issue< as Mark D said. With today's motion offenses, it just doesn't come into play as much as it used to.

beachbum

I always give one warning.. "get out of the lane 34". But if the player is moving across and takes alittle more than the 3 seconds, i ignore it. Camping is my key component.

I called it last week on a player that remained in the lane to set for a rebound. The more advanced high scholl teams run set offences so it is easy to tell what the players will do. The play wasn't around him, so there was no ADV/DVG,, but his ultimate goal was to have an advantage. I heard his coach yell at him to get out of the lane in approval of my call.
Usually by the time I realize I should be counting, it's been a second or two anyways. so they are getting a little break. it's suprising that coaches and fans believe that we just sit under the basket looking for 3 second violations.

AND with the 5 or 10 second count, I try to move my arm a little slower than a second per movement.

Ignats75

AND with the 5 or 10 second count, I try to move my arm a little slower than a second per movement.

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

Now this one I really do not like. The rules require 5 seconds (not 6 1/2) for an inbounds. It requires 10 seconds (not 13) to advance the ball into the front court. Why would you punish the defense by making it harder for them to force a turnover?:rolleyes: We are supposed to be impartial. That is showing favoritism to the offense!!!!!:mad::mad:

I guess I was one of those nasty in your face defenders when I was younger. I appreciate hustling defense. Thats why I try to calibrate my visible count when I am coming up court by synchronizing my arm to the clock. Thats why I try to never miss a closely guarded count.

zm1283

beachbum wrote
AND with the 5 or 10 second count, I try to move my arm a little slower than a second per movement.

Why? It's a five or 10 second count for a reason.

Chess Ref

zm1283 wrote
Why? It's a five or 10 second count for a reason.

I fall on the side of trying to get my counts right. If I have a 10 second call at 10 seconds so be it. I don't give extra time..

bob jenkins

Chess Ref wrote
I fall on the side of trying to get my counts right. If I have a 10 second call at 10 seconds so be it. I don't give extra time..

Agreed. But, it's better (imo) to be at 11 than to be at 9.

Ignats75

bob jenkins wrote
Agreed. But, it's better (imo) to be at 11 than to be at 9.

If my count is calibrated right, they should get about 10.5 seconds anyway. If I am visibly counting the inbounds pass with my right hand, that means I am chopping the clock with my left. I will then count the backcourt with my left hand. That will automatically give the offense approximately .5 second.

If I am administering the throw-in, I will not start my count until I back away from the thrower a step or two. That gives them about a .5 second too. Once I start my count, its 5 or 10 on the nose (or as close as I can get).

beachbum

When I said I try to be alittle slow, I didn't mean I'm trying to give 15 seconds....I just don't want to be at 9. Since officials can get pumped during a good game and really move their arm too fast, I make a consious effort to make sure I'm just a shade over.

beachbum

I know, maybe we can argue for a couple of days if the count should be exact.

What's a .5 of a second, give or take .25 anyways!!!!!!

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
Agreed. But, it's better to be at 11 than to be at 9.

Always listen to bob. Happy New Year.

LeeBallanfant

bob jenkins wrote
Agreed. But, it's better (imo) to be at 11 than to be at 9.

Not when the ball is deflected out of bounds and the shot clock shows 10+ seconds elapsed. Of course, you can always blame the shot clock timer for starting too early.

BillyMac

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. wrote
I have only been officiating for 38 years.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.: This is the way you start the New Year, by stretching the truth, or telling, what my grandmother used to call, "white lies"? My ex called this a lie of omission. Maybe you've only been doing college games for 38 years, but we all know that you've been doing lower level games for a lot longer than that. How many times have you talked about holding the ladder for "Jimmy" when he first decided to hang up those peach baskets?

bob jenkins

LeeBallanfant wrote
Not when the ball is deflected out of bounds and the shot clock shows 10+ seconds elapsed. Of course, you can always blame the shot clock timer for starting too early.

Let me rephrase -- it's never worse to be at 11 than to be at 9.

While the official in your example would catch some grief, so would the official who called a violation when the shot clock showes 9 seconds elapsed.

(all assuming immediate control and a proper shot clock, of course).

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

BillyMac wrote
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.: This is the way you start the New Year, by stretching the truth, or telling, what my grandmother used to call, "white lies"? My ex called this a lie of omission. Maybe you've only been doing college games for 38 years, but we all know that you've been doing lower level games for a lot longer than that. How many times have you talked about holding the ladder for "Jimmy" when he first decided to hang up those peach baskets?

ROFLMAO 😀

MTD, Sr.