admitting to a coach you made a mistake

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I can only speak for myself on what works for me. I will not nod just for the purpose to make everyone know I agree with the call of my partner, but I will nod when talking to a coach to get them to understand what I am saying to them. But that is a little different than doing so after a call you are not participating in. I do nod if my partner and I have a double whistle and I only do it to acknowledge that we have the same thing or that someone has the call. Usually this is followed by some verbal exchange or comment about who is going to the table.

Peace

No, I'm not talking about what you do in practice. I'm talking about a double whistle between partners and one feels obligated to nod as a way of telling everyone he/she had the same thing even if they didn't. It just sounds silly to me. Have I ever nodded on a basketball court? Yes. Will I nod just because I have a double whistle with my partner? Not a chance. If it is something that comes naturally, I will do it. I will leave the acting to someone else.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by just another ref

No matter who said it, it is still ridiculous, not to mention unnecessary. For those who do feel compelled to abide by this principle, you could eliminate preliminary signals altogether. What real purpose do they serve?

On several occasions, I have seen this and it could have been avoided if the officials had simply called in their area. Seeing entire plays, without anticipating, is one thing that will help avoid this situation as well as understanding situations where you may have to come out of your primary to get something. Didn't this whole thing start when two D1 officials were two stubborn to give a call up, at least one of which was spraying calls all over the court?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tomegun

No, I'm not talking about what you do in practice. I'm talking about a double whistle between partners and one feels obligated to nod as a way of telling everyone he/she had the same thing even if they didn't. It just sounds silly to me. Have I ever nodded on a basketball court? Yes. Will I nod just because I have a double whistle with my partner? Not a chance. If it is something that comes naturally, I will do it. I will leave the acting to someone else.

I do not do anything for acting purposes; I do what I do for communication purposes. Because many times a partner cannot hear me, I might do something to get them to understand me. Honestly I never really thought of it that much until I read this here. I only do something to communicate better, not to put on an act or do something artificial. That being said, I have no problem with your position or your reasoning. Not everything one person does works for another person. That is the nature of what we do.

Peace

[walter]

Another little tidbit from camps was the discussion that a double whistle can be either one official reaching and getting something or a "confirmation whistle, especially down the stretch". In fact one camp stressed that in close games down the stretch, "confirmation whistles" are good things. Don't necessarily agree but wanted to know if anyone else heard this at camp?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by walter

Another little tidbit from camps was the discussion that a double whistle can be either one official reaching and getting something or a "confirmation whistle, especially down the stretch". In fact one camp stressed that in close games down the stretch, "confirmation whistles" are good things. Don't necessarily agree but wanted to know if anyone else heard this at camp?

The concept that double whistls can be good on close calls is something I've heard. I've never heard the idea proposed that purposefully blowing you whistle as some sort of confirmation, though. Strikes me as something like nodding.

Originally Posted by walter

Another little tidbit from camps was the discussion that a double whistle can be either one official reaching and getting something or a "confirmation whistle, especially down the stretch". In fact one camp stressed that in close games down the stretch, "confirmation whistles" are good things. Don't necessarily agree but wanted to know if anyone else heard this at camp?

Double whistles on plays to the basket (at most points in the game NOT just EOG situations) are a good thing in 3 person games. It solidifies the call & negates most pushback as 2 officials called it, so perception-wise, it must be right
In the paint, a triple whistle isn't a bad thing either...

[walter]

It was described pretty much in the same vein as the nod. The clinicians also pointed out that on plays to the basket, a double whistle can be a good thing. All the camps were 3 person camps.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Double whistles on plays to the basket (at most points in the game NOT just EOG situations) are a good thing in 3 person games. It solidifies the call & negates most pushback as 2 officials called it, so perception-wise, it must be right
In the paint, a triple whistle isn't a bad thing either...

I understand the concept of the "confirmation" whistle but I would say steer clear of doing this just to help your partner. If you saw the contact then blow, no problem.
That being said, double whistles are good at times but if you watch NBA games, which I'm sure most don't! Ha they have a lot of single whistles on obvious fouls and that's because they are very aware of their partners and only have whistles when they are absolutely certain the official who "should" be blowing doesn't and then they come in with their whistle. Its not a secondary whistle because it is more than likely a dual coverage area. For example, a player who gets obviously bodychecked on the way to the hole, the trail and slot are aware that it is headed to the hoop and will allow the lead to blow and if for whatever reason, he doesn't react then the slot or trail will react accordingly.

I would much rather have a double whistle on a difficult play than on an obvious foul. anyone can call a blatantly obvious foul from anywhere on the floor but knowing when and when not to have double whistles is a true art of officiating, imo.

Originally Posted by btaylor64

For example, a player who gets obviously bodychecked on the way to the hole, the trail and slot are aware that it is headed to the hoop and will allow the lead to blow and if for whatever reason, he doesn't react then the slot or trail will react accordingly.

I would much rather have a double whistle on a difficult play than on an obvious foul. anyone can call a blatantly obvious foul from anywhere on the floor but knowing when and when not to have double whistles is a true art of officiating, imo.

I think the play in your example is more of the T & Slot following the SDF principles than waiting for the L to get it.

I agree with the rest of your thoughts.