Proper Mechanics Questions (NFHS)

[Rich]

Originally Posted by referee99

Again, switch all fouls is the mechanic. You can really showcase your cohesion and athleticism as a team by nailing this. At the same time, to keep flow of the game and coverage of players, I pre-game an audible option here.

Non-calling official should force the switch. Frozen eyes, active feet.

Stooooooopid.

You can really showcase your common sense by not long switching in this situation. Perhaps someday 2-person mechanics will catch up to the 3-person ones already in the book.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Stooooooopid.

You can really showcase your common sense by not long switching in this situation. Perhaps someday 2-person mechanics will catch up to the 3-person ones already in the book.

Agreed. While I usually switch on all fouls, including long-switching, I like working 3-person mechanics a LOT better. I think 2-person mechanics sometimes make it hard to observe players as the non-calling official.

[referee99]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Stooooooopid.

You can really showcase your common sense by not long switching in this situation. Perhaps someday 2-person mechanics will catch up to the 3-person ones already in the book.

I know a lot of associations choose to ignore, but this is the prescribed mechanic in the book: Switch on all fouls. Non-calling official force the switch.

And, I believe the mechanics manual only comes out every other year(?) because no new one this year. So, your manual is the current one.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by referee99

I know a lot of associations choose to ignore, but this is the prescribed mechanic in the book: Switch on all fouls. Non-calling official force the switch.

And, I believe the mechanics manual only comes out every other year(?) because no new one this year. So, your manual is the current one.

I don't have ANY manual. I misplaced last year's -- that was my point.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Stooooooopid.

You can really showcase your common sense by not long switching in this situation. Perhaps someday 2-person mechanics will catch up to the 3-person ones already in the book.

Rich,
Personally, I have always found the "no-long-switch" mechanic to slow the 3-man game down. I don't mind running a little while waiting to put the ball in play. The players are frequently confused as to where the ball is to be inbounded when they see the old lead/new trail stepping out to call the foul. Everyone then has to wait for the old lead/new trail to go back into his position and administer the throw-in.

I work with various partners in both 2-man and 3-man. I find that I stay much more focused on the game when proper mechanics are used. When the officials are hustling into position while watching the players, the game can really move. I much prefer to long switch on "no-long-switch" situations in 2-man. The game definitely moves faster albeit with a little more running on the part of the officiating crew.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Rich,
Personally, I have always found the "no-long-switch" mechanic to slow the 3-man game down. I don't mind running a little while waiting to put the ball in play. The players are frequently confused as to where the ball is to be inbounded when they see the old lead/new trail stepping out to call the foul. Everyone then has to wait for the old lead/new trail to go back into his position and administer the throw-in.

I work with various partners in both 2-man and 3-man. I find that I stay much more focused on the game when proper mechanics are used. When the officials are hustling into position while watching the players, the game can really move. I much prefer to long switch on "no-long-switch" situations in 2-man. The game definitely moves faster albeit with a little more running on the part of the officiating crew.

Officials who move with a purpose can keep a game moving regardless of the mechanics used. My most frequent partner and I do not long switch and there is very little dead time regardless of what is called.

[Lcubed48]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Rich,
Personally, I have always found the "no-long-switch" mechanic to slow the 3-man game down. I don't mind running a little while waiting to put the ball in play. The players are frequently confused as to where the ball is to be inbounded when they see the old lead/new trail stepping out to call the foul. Everyone then has to wait for the old lead/new trail to go back into his position and administer the throw-in.

I work with various partners in both 2-man and 3-man. I find that I stay much more focused on the game when proper mechanics are used. When the officials are hustling into position while watching the players, the game can really move. I much prefer to long switch on "no-long-switch" situations in 2-man. The game definitely moves faster albeit with a little more running on the part of the officiating crew.

I don't like the long switch in 3 whistle game. It just seems to not be needed when there are 3 officials on the floor. It's a slide when moving from BC to the FC, and that is how I pregame it.
However in a 2 whistle game, I do pregame one situation where a long switch is OK. Team B is pressing Team A in Team A's BC. The new L is hanging back helping his/her P, and there is an OOB or a violation on the new T's side of the court that will give the ball back to Team B. It seems to me easier (and more timely - although I do understand Rich's opposite view) for the old L to now become the new L.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by Lcubed48

I don't like the long switch in 3 whistle game. It just seems to not be needed when there are 3 officials on the floor.

Obviously, the only ones that count -- those that write the mechanics manual -- agree with you.

I still maintain that the game is slowed down as we wait for the official to step out, report the foul, and step all the way back. The game is especially slowed down, in my opinion, when the ball is being inbounded along the baseline OPPOSITE the table. In this case, if the former C or T would move up to become the new T, the former L (and reporting official) would become the new C (go to the table and stay), and the former T or C would become the new L. This would, in my opinion, be a much more efficient switch as opposed to the current mechanic.

[Lcubed48]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Obviously, the only ones that count -- those that write the mechanics manual -- agree with you.

I still maintain that the game is slowed down as we wait for the official to step out, report the foul, and step all the way back. The game is especially slowed down, in my opinion, when the ball is being inbounded along the baseline OPPOSITE the table. In this case, if the former C or T would move up to become the new T, the former L (and reporting official) would become the new C (go to the table and stay), and the former T or C would become the new L.

I do see your point. When the L who is opposite the table makes the call, it would seem to be faster, as you suggest, that they just exchange places with the C who is table side and move on. It does feel as if that would speed the game along. However when in Rome ... , has officials in my area doing the no switch/slide. It took me awhile to get the feel for allowing the 2 whistle long switch. So maybe as I get more 3 whistle experience, I can add that to my pregame. My first game as the R in a varsity game comes up later this week. But for some reason, it will be a 2 whistle game - probably due a heavy load of varsity games that night. Yes, my pregame will indeed include the one long switch allowed.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

Obviously, the only ones that count -- those that write the mechanics manual -- agree with you.

I still maintain that the game is slowed down as we wait for the official to step out, report the foul, and step all the way back. The game is especially slowed down, in my opinion, when the ball is being inbounded along the baseline OPPOSITE the table. In this case, if the former C or T would move up to become the new T, the former L (and reporting official) would become the new C (go to the table and stay), and the former T or C would become the new L. This would, in my opinion, be a much more efficient switch as opposed to the current mechanic.

The reporting official only has to clear the players (in my world, anyway) to report and the C can handle any subs coming to the table. I don't see it being any quicker to switch there.