NFHS Mechanics Question (3)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Nope, but I am sure he will walk down beside the official for a quick question. I have responded to questions from coaches without taking my eyes of players.

How do you do that for the coach at the other end of the court?

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The attitude being displayed here by some posters that the officials can be anywhere they please and watching whatever they wish during the first FT because the chance that something which needs to be penalized is slim is way to cavalier for my taste. It also looks unprofessional.

No, that's just your twisted interpretation. My supervisors don't have a problem with the trail in a 3-man crew addressing the coach in the backcourt during the 1st of 2 free throws as long as they are in position for the 2nd. They also expect the lead to recognize if the Trail is addressing the coaches or table and ensure the Trail is ready before administering any "live" free throws (single throw; 1-and-1; 2nd of 2; 3rd of 3).

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

In one breath you admit that it is harder for two officials to look around and see everyone that they need to even prior to the administration of the FT, yet you agree with Rich and think that it is okay to have the third official wander away from his prescribed position and leave his TWO partners to handle those tasks despite your acknowledgment of their difficulty in doing so!

Find me a direct quote where I said anything you just typed here. You will hard-pressed to do so. If you are going to para-phase my thoughts please so do so at least semi-accurately.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Hmmmmmmm...... with such an attitude do you even see the value in having that third official on the court? Do you think that he's only there to help out on certain plays or a select times? Is your idea of 3-man that it is basically 2-man with an extra helper who makes calls when he is needed, and that he isn't needed during dead ball periods or less active times such as FT administration?

I'm not surprised by Rich expressing such a sentiment because he predominately works 2-man.

The rest of us should remember that 3-man isn't supposed to be lazy 2-man.

PS How many times has FT administration been a POE in the past few years? Could it be because people aren't taking it seriously and think that it is time to take a rest?

WTF are you talking about? Mentally lazy would best describe what your just typed b/c you just pulled some sh!t out of thin air instead of actually taking the time to read and comprehend what has actually been written.

[IREFU2]

I cant ever remembering having to address a coach in the BC during a FT as the trail. But, I have address them in FC as the trail on several occations while in the trail position. This is both on the college and high school level. Just my 2 cents, not speaking for anyone else.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

I cant ever remembering having to address a coach in the BC during a FT as the trail. But, I have address them in FC as the trail on several occations while in the trail position. This is both on the college and high school level. Just my 2 cents, not speaking for anyone else.

So you've never had a coach in the backcourt who wanted to ask a question?

[IREFU2]

Not that I can think of right now. The last coach that had a question that was located in the back court, actually came into front court complaining and I stopped the game and walked him back to his box in the BC.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

Not that I can think of right now. The last coach that had a question that was located in the back court, actually came into front court complaining and I stopped the game and walked him back to his box in the BC.

So you should have T'd him up.

I just find it hard to believe that in the 2nd half of all your games that the defensive coach has never had a question after his team has been whistled for a foul. If that's the case then being able to communicate to coaches in the trail shouldn't be that important.

[Nevadaref]

Since when are the thoughts of a coach about a call considered important?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since when are the thoughts of a coach about a call considered important?

So remind me again why the NFHS went to the new 2-man mechanic of putting the trail tableside?

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since when are the thoughts of a coach about a call considered important?

Maybe their thoughts aren't important, but the mere fact that we took a moment to communicate what happened is NOT a bad thing.
Could be the difference in putting out a small fire or pouring gasoline on the fire.

I think what seperates the best of the best from the rest is great communication skills.

That being said, if you're talking to a coach/player on the first FT we shouldn't still be talking or holding up the game for the second FT.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since when are the thoughts of a coach about a call considered important?

You're kidding, right?

While a coach isn't going to get a call changed, I sureashell know part of the gig is listening and talking and going tableside was put in place to facilitate that communication.

[IREFU2]

Like I said, to the best of my knowlegde, nothing that I can remember sticks out. As far as the "t", he was loosing and fustrated. IMO, a T was not warranted in that situation and my partners thanked me for not giving him a T. Now, in my earlier days, I would have stuck em.....

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

My supervisors don't have a problem with the trail in a 3-man crew addressing the coach in the backcourt during the 1st of 2 free throws as long as they are in position for the 2nd. They also expect the lead to recognize if the Trail is addressing the coaches or table and ensure the Trail is ready before administering any "live" free throws (single throw; 1-and-1; 2nd of 2; 3rd of 3).

Where is Jurassic when I need him? This is fully deserving of a "Lah me."

Are you freaking kidding? Your supervisors are not only fools, they are doing you a great disservice by allowing you to instill such a bad habit in your game.

What they are stating by accepting that practice is that there is absolutely nothing for the Trail official in a 3-man crew to do prior to the ball becoming live on the final FT. In other words, they are sure that those two other guys out there can handle everything and anything perfectly. That's just BS and you know it. Every trainer on the planet stresses the importance of being vigilant during dead ball periods. I'm sure that you've heard that those are the times when the most problems arise.

Would your supervisor have a problem if the Trail official went over and got a drink of water during this time? How about if he left the court and went to the drinking fountain in the hallway? He's not doing any officiating then anyway.

Then to state that the Lead should wait until the Trail is finished talking with the coach and has returned to where he belongs prior to making the ball live is utter nonsense. That's just giving the coach a free time-out. If he's smart he can rest his players any time he wants just by asking a few silly questions. There's rule against a team preventing the ball from being made promptly live. Are your supers aware of that?

I guess that in southern VA the officials allow the coaches to hold up the game and resume it at the pace that they desire and when they are good and ready. This should work wonderfully for the slow-tempo team and annoy the heck out of the coach of the full-court pressing side. And I thought that a basketball game took so long because of all the media time-outs.

Thankfully, I officiated in northern VA. Lah-freakin'-me.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Where is Jurassic when I need him? This is fully deserving of a "Lah me."

Are you freaking kidding? Your supervisors are not only fools, they are doing you a great disservice by allowing you to instill such a bad habit in your game.

What they are stating by accepting that practice is that there is absolutely nothing for the Trail official in a 3-man crew to do prior to the ball becoming live on the final FT. In other words, they are sure that those two other guys out there can handle everything and anything perfectly. That's just BS and you know it. Every trainer on the planet stresses the importance of being vigilant during dead ball periods. I'm sure that you've heard that those are the times when the most problems arise.

Would your supervisor have a problem if the Trail official went over and got a drink of water during this time? How about if he left the court and went to the drinking fountain in the hallway? He's not doing any officiating then anyway.

Then to state that the Lead should wait until the Trail is finished talking with the coach and has returned to where he belongs prior to making the ball live is utter nonsense. That's just giving the coach a free time-out. If he's smart he can rest his players any time he wants just by asking a few silly questions. There's rule against a team preventing the ball from being made promptly live. Are your supers aware of that?

I guess that in southern VA the officials allow the coaches to hold up the game and resume it at the pace that they desire and when they are good and ready. This should work wonderfully for the slow-tempo team and annoy the heck out of the coach of the full-court pressing side. And I thought that a basketball game took so long because of all the media time-outs.

Thankfully, I officiated in northern VA. Lah-freakin'-me.

Well, 2 of those supervisors are multiple Final Four officials but I'll pass along your displeasure.

And where do you get the idiotic premise that every free throw requires an extended conversation with a coach or that the trail spends all free throws commesurating with table personnel? Surely not from anything I've written to date. You do have a Georgetown education so I'm sure your comprehension skills can't be that lacking. Or was hyperbole a major at GU?

And I guess if you are ever addressing a problem at the table you pre-game for your partners to go ahead and administer the free throws and you'll catch up with game action later?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Well, 2 of those supervisors are multiple Final Four officials but I'll pass along your displeasure.

Please do because what they are teaching is irresponsible. It's that damn big-dog attitude of I can get away with doing this because I've been doing this for so many years and I'm that good. I'd guess that they are old school officials who don't care for all the precision in the mechanics and adherence to the rulesbook that is being demanded by the NCAA brass these days.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

And where do you get the idiotic premise that every free throw requires an extended conversation with a coach? Do you ever use common sense in your posts or was hyperbole a major at Georgetown?

The Jesuits are big teachers of Sophist philosophy.
But for the record, I don't think that ANY FT situation requires an extended conversation with a coach. If I ever had to wait for you to finish chatting with a coach before administering a FT, I'd be so ticked off that the next time that I threw you the ball it would hit your shoetops.

When a coach won't let something go, I've used, "You'll see it on the tape, and if you don't like it, I'm sure that you send it to X," and that's the end of it. Does it make the coaches happy that I won't coddle them? Nope. Do I care? Nope. I've got a game to administer. I'm not trying to be their best friend or make their Christmas card list.
I guess you're the type who feels their pain.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

And I guess if you are ever addressing a problem at the table you pre-game for your partners to go ahead and administer the free throws and you'll catch up?

See your own point above.

PS The table is part of the officiating crew. If they have a problem or a question, WE have a problem or a question. That's vastly different from a coach with a gripe or an ulterior motive slowing down the game. I know that the table personnel isn't trying to gain a competitive advantage by making an inquiry.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

When a coach won't let something go, I've used, "You'll see it on the tape, and if you don't like it, I'm sure that you send it to X," and that's the end of it. Does it make the coaches happy that I won't coddle them? Nope. Do I care? Nope. I've got a game to administer. I'm not trying to be their best friend or make their Christmas card list.
I guess you're the type who feels their pain.

Again, you're just pulling doo-doo from thin air. And again, I'm waiting for you to point to anything in my posts that says anything about extended conversations with coaches. Guess you just don't know me too well. or (can't decide on which to use since I'm so wishy-washy)

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

See your own point above.

PS The table is part of the officiating crew. If they have a problem or a question, WE have a problem or a question. That's vastly different from a coach with a gripe or an ulterior motive slowing down the game. I know that the table personnel isn't trying to gain a competitive advantage by making an inquiry.

Doesn't say much for the coaches in Nevada if every time they ask you a question it's for the sole purpose of slowing down the game. Must be a regional thing.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Please do because what they are teaching is irresponsible. It's that damn big-dog attitude of I can get away with doing this because I've been doing this for so many years and I'm that good. I'd guess that they are old school officials who don't care for all the precision in the mechanics and adherence to the rulesbook that is being demanded by the NCAA brass these days.

They are big-dawgs by accomplishment, not attitude. They believe in civil, pertinent, concise, and short communication with coaches when needed. Even if it means sacrificing the santity of the game by quickly stepping into the backcourt to answer a question during a free throw.

And they are most definitely sticklers for proper mechanics. And they also live in the real world and tell you that there are things that some officials can do and get away with that others cannot. And that is reality, like it or not.

BTW, still waiting on the answer for this one:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Since when are the thoughts of a coach about a call considered important?

So remind me again why the NFHS went to the new 2-man mechanic of putting the trail tableside?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So remind me again why the NFHS went to the new 2-man mechanic of putting the trail tableside?

In my area it's going to increase the team FT percentages because the best FT shooters are the ones who get to attempt the shots for technical fouls.

I doubt that's what the NFHS had in mind though.