Ruling

[JRutledge]

I see this as a no-win situation for the official. If you say something before, then coach might complain and want to argue the rule. If you only signal violation without previous communication, then the coach will could complain there was no violation and you would have to explain the situation in the anyway. What will save you is if the coach is reasonable and trusts your judgment. But as many coaches do, they tend to think we have motives we do not have, so you might have to find yourself dealing with comments that might lead to other actions needing to be taken. Think of all the times coaches go crazy over basic rules (slapping the backboard, over the back situations, uniform rules, and foul situations) and you think most coaches are going to just "let this go?" This is why this is a bad interpretation. It is also a very rare situation unlike those other things I listed.

Peace

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

What will save you is if the coach is reasonable and trusts your judgment.

I guesss that's possible.....sometimes......someday........maybe.

[deecee]

Or just dont put up the signal until the free throw has been attempted.

[ref2coach]

After the ball is provided to the free thrower just put up your delay signal. If the thrower misses call the violation. Coach or player asks, you answer, #11 violated, citing the number of the player you remember violated. 99% of time that's it. The only way you get further question is if the violator had been substituted. Then and only then would you have to have the more lengthly description of when the violation occurred.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by ref2coach

Coach or player asks, you answer, #11 violated, citing the number of the player you remember violated. 99% of time that's it.
The only way you get further question is if the violator had been substituted.

"But he is not in the game."

"He is not on the line."

"He did not move."

"What are you talking about?"

"But he came into the lane."

"You did what in a one point game?"

Originally Posted by ref2coach

Then and only then would you have to have the more lengthly description of when the violation occurred.

I could see all kinds of reasoning for there being a debate or confrontation. Now this is not likely to happen, but if it does, do not be surprised what coaches come up with. If there is a discussion over a block/charge call, what kind of debate are we going to have over an obscure rule?

Peace

[Shades of Gray]

I don't post very much, but I read the board frequently and I notice that whenever you don't like a rule, it is an "obscure" rule. Is that the definition of obscure?

[Caesar's Ghost]

Originally Posted by Shades of Gray

I don't post very much, but I read the board frequently and I notice that whenever you don't like a rule, it is an "obscure" rule. Is that the definition of obscure?

Only rules 1 through 10 are obscure to JRutledge.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Shades of Gray

I don't post very much, but I read the board frequently and I notice that whenever you don't like a rule, it is an "obscure" rule. Is that the definition of obscure?

No, "obscure" is quite simple; it's a rule that you've never actually seen enforced.

Examples:
10 second free throw count
Goal tending on a free throw = Technical foul
Reaching across the plane during a throwin and fouling the thrower = intentional foul + warning
striking the ball with your fist
multiple foul

Most of these are never called because they hardly ever happen. Some (multiple fouls) happen occasionally but still never get called.