New FT 2 man mechanic
 

When working lead and administering the ball on a bounce to the FT shoooter I walk away and signal the amount of throws with one hand, who am I now signaling to? the table that can not see or the players or the fans?

I did this too.
 

I guess no one. No good reason to anymore to do that. But then again it was not an "accepted" mechanic anyway. ;)

Peace

How about as trail with my back to the table? Do I visually signal the amount of throws? If so who am I doing this towards?

Table and Partner.
Once Lead gives it to players, I drop my *toward Division line* signal.

Isn't the lead indicating the number of shots for the players lined up along the lane, most of whom may not have seen the preliminary signal and who are naturally heading toward the lane in the opposite direction of the calling official who goes to report and take his position as trail behind the view of the players lining up for the foul?

He's speaking about after the Lead administers the free throw and steps out of the lane. A lot of officials (ie: myself) then give an additional shot indication in the direction of the table/benches.

The lead should have vocally and visibly stated the number of free throws before bouncing the ball to the shooter. That's for the players lined up in the lane. I don't believe there is a required mechanic for the lead to signal the amount of free throws with one hand while walking back to their spot after bouncing the ball to the shooter.

I do the same as Smitty indicates. I announce the number of shots nice and loud so everyone knows how many the shooter will take before bouncing the ball to the shooter (of course, that doesn't prevent the "zoned out" player who isn't paying attention from jumping in the lane anyhow).

I "used to" indicate number of shots with my hand while backing out too, but was told not to during an evaluation. I stopped.

Why? What does it add? What is the trail (or C in 3-person) doing?

For me it just ensures that what I said in the lane is the same as what everyone else expects to come. I've also used it to correct announcers who say the wrong amount of shots on the PA. Just an added communication tool.

It doesn't interfere with any of my other responsibilities and no one (supervisors/evaluators/observers) has ever told me not to do it.

I agree completely.

How's things going in Dallas? I'm going to miss working with you - always enjoyed it........

Thanks Tim. Same here. I love Dallas. As far as officiating in Dallas, it's been....interesting. It would be best discuss it offline. :o

I will say this much, I would recommend to anyone fortunate enough to work in Portland to go up and give Howard a big hug. You don't know how good you have it there...

You've gotta be kidding me right? This mechanic is not even in the manual. There is no need to do it. It is simply a last chance communication many of us use just for a little more confirmation, or quite simply we see 'em do it on tv.

It has really boggled my mind that this tableside issue has sparked so much debate. The only place officials do not go tableside is NCAA-M, the NBA, WNBA, NCAA-W and (correct me if I'm wrong) FIBA all go table side. Now that the NFHS has made the change, NCAA-M are the only group still going opposite. If this was not a good and viable option, why are all the top leagues IN THE WORLD doing it? It is not a difficult mechanic to master and it boggles my mind that so many are making such a big deal out of trivial things like, who do I make a non-approved signal to since noone can see me now.

Sorry for the rant, but I really just don't get why this has been given so much discussion...I really don't.

Ok, I'm done, thanks guys! :D

Luckily he's met some really great people here!! :p

That makes one! :) But I'm not sure you count since you're not in the Dallas association. I have met some really nice people here but they just do things....different. I'll have to see how the meetings go and how they schedule games. It's always interesting when you move to a new place. I'll pay my dues and hopefully impress enough people who matter.

And for what it's worth, I agree with you about the tableside free throw mechanic. It's insignificant. I guess there are just no other rule changes for people to complain about.

I usually indicate the count in the direction of the free throw circle, no matter which position I’m at. However, most everyone should be able to see it. Just before the ball is administered to the free thrower from the lead, all officials (2 man or 3 man) should indicate the shots to be taken. Everyone in the gym should be able to see at least one of you holding up the shot count. Most importantly, though, is that the players and your partners see. The players; so they know how to react to the shot. And your partners; to make sure you and your partners all have the same count making sure you don’t end up with a correctable error situation.

I'm still waiting on the rationale for the change. I can change mechanics with my eyes closed, I do that on a daily basis during the season. But to me, it was just change for change's sake.

I actually see more complaints about supposed complaints than I do actual complaints about the new mechanic. It might amaze those prone to ranting that a "question" does not equal a "complaint".

We were told at the EOT tournament this summer not to use the new mechanic, as Oregon will not be adopting it. We'll find out for sure soon - first PBOA meeting is in about 3 weeks..........

We've been using the mechanic in Texas for several years now. It works fine and there's no issue with it. Its easier except that the lead might have to think about where he is backing toward, especially if he works a lot of 3 man. But its much easier for the new trail: report, turn around, take care of business. You have nothing to watch but the players, which is a good thing. Before the second free throw, take a quick glance for subs (hopefully the clock is doing their job, but often they aren't). If the coach wants a quick explanation, you are right there. I don't recall ever giving a technical from this position. Not saying it won't happen, but I think the fact that you are there and listening gets you 90% of the way down the road toward not having to give a T.

GREAT POST!!! I'm widely known as being a hothead and having a quick trigger finger...but I have never called a foul, went to the table then had to wack the coach...I'm there and we can talk calmly. If I had to turn my back and walk away from them, they'd go ballistic.

So coaches would go ballistic if/when you are working (if not already) NCAA-M mechanics?

I haven't had that problem.

Do you really think that is what CLH implied?
...I didn't think so.

No, what I inferred from his earlier rant is that anyone who doesn't like or has questioned the new mechanic in 2-man is scared of or can't communicate with coaches.

I purposely used the same faulty logic in response to his post. ;)

Perhaps you don't fall into this category, but I think if you look at the main complaints about this new mechanic when it was first released, I think you'll find that's exactly what people were saying. That seemed to be the main issue with the majority of people who don't like it. Not everyone, but the majority who did complain.

I'm not sure people were complaining as much as asking for the rationale. I saw assumptions that it had to do with communicating with the coaches but I have yet to read that from the NFHS (maybe I just missed it). But assuming that is the rationale I personally don't see how it would enhance communication. On free throws the Trail is going to nowhere near one of the coaches, and in the 2nd half it's going to be the coach most likely looking for an answer to a question since his/her team just sent the opposing team to the free throw line.

I just prefer the old mechanic based on court vision. Of course some folks here have a heart attack if someone expresses a preference for something. If your thought process or logic is not the same as theirs then you can't possibly be a good official. :cool:

Maybe you're right about that. I recall seeing something from the NFHS about the rationale being better communication, but I can't find it now either.

I liked the old way better, too, but I don't mind the new way. I would much rather, if a coach did have something to say, that they said it to me quietly while I was near them, rather than yelling across the court. The only thing I really don't like about the new mechanic is that I have to turn my head to look for subs and they often seem to sneak them over to the table just after I turn my head back to the court.

Ain't it swell that the lead glances at the table before administering? :)

It's sort of swell. I still feel like I missed something when I hear the lead's whistle blow to bring in subs after a made last free throw because I didn't see the subs. I feel like that is my responsibility and I don't like missing it.

If a coach wants to yell and scream let them. A coach can get a T just as easily for saying something quietly when you're on the same side of the floor.

If a coach has a question and properly phrases it, they will get an answer at the appropriate time.

Interesting philosophy. I'm not necessarily talking about a T. Often the coach simply wants an explanation of the foul. "What did he do?". I prefer being next to him so I can explain rather than have him have to yell across the court.

Many coaches used to beckon officials to their bench areas, and did not start yelling unless they were ignored.
A quick jog across the court took care of that.
However, as shown above, that sitch is now mostly moot.

Did they accompany the beckon with a "Here, Fido...."?

The lead doesn't need to (and shouldn't, imo) whistle to bring in the subs. Just indicate to the trail that there are subs waiting. It's the same as in 3-person.

Nope.
You're the first.

Now it will a quick jog to the backcourt. Nothing has changed except the direction the official would have to jog.

I was taught it a signal to make sure all people on the floor, and table know how many shots.