Video: end of game
 

This is the video from the end of the Nevada 4A girl's championship.

1. Notice the C's position when the ball hits him.
2. Was the girl in the act of shooting when the foul was called?
3. Why was there such a long conversation and what could the C have added?

User Media - TinyPic - Free Image Hosting, Photo Sharing & Video Hosting

Last Play
 

No bites yet, so I'll take a shot . . .
1. Notice the C's position when the ball hits him.
A little deep, perhaps? There were a lot of bodies between him and the play on which a foul was called, but that wasn't his primary anyway. Not sure why he had so much input in the conference that followed, unless he was the R and he was asking his two partners what they each had.
2. Was the girl in the act of shooting when the foul was called?
The blocking foul was called on the attempted drive by the player who then, after the foul, continued for a try. The shooter, therefore, had not yet begun "the motion which habitually precedes the release of the ball" on an attempt. At first, I thought the T had a different call, but after review it looks like she was getting the player who would go to the line.
3. Why was there such a long conversation and what could the C have added?
Either he was fixated outside his primary and he was telling his partners what to call (the L already had it), or he was the R sorting out what his two partners had.

Am I close?

I just posted the play for learning purposes. The C gets hit with the ball because he is way too far on the court.

The foul, and possible continuous motion, was the one where the official called it a shooting foul. What is questionable, and virtually impossible to tell from the film, is whether it should have been in the act of shooting. The reason it is even a point of discussion is high school and college officials call far too many fouls on the ground when they should be in the act of shooting. The rules regarding continuous motion for the NBA, NCAA and NFHS are virtually the same so they should be called the same.

The conference was too long, in my opinion, for a foul at this point in the game. It looks like there is a lot of doubt about what is going on. Also, I have no idea what the C would have to offer; when I see him I'm going to find a gentle way to ask him.

Sorry, but I'll come out and say it: They look confused and not very sure of themselves.

1. Notice the C's position when the ball hits him.

Why was he so close to the lane? Step down if anything, but don't close in on the play unless you have a held ball or foul.

2. Was the girl in the act of shooting when the foul was called?

No. He got this part right.

3. Why was there such a long conversation and what could the C have added?

Your guess is as good as mine. I'm not sure why the C came in like that. Officiate the dead ball period and help the old Trail get the shooter while the L reports the foul. That part made them look bad IMO.

On an unrelated note, is it common for coaches there to wear sweatpants and long sleeve t-shirts for state championship games like the white team's HC?

I'm not sure about the attire. The Mississippi Boy's state champion coach wore a white suit to the game. :D

I have to ask, why do you say step down at the C? Without looking at the play, I'm not sure if that is the correct way to get an open look; actually stepping up will help many times when the ball is headed toward the hoop. I know one school of thought is to step down all the time, but that will keep a "stacked" point of view many times.

My guess is the C had an imaginary ring in his nose with an imaginary rope attached to it and the ball. In other words, he was ball watching big time, wanted a closer look and got caught up. Sadly, the fact that the ball hit him could have decided the state championship. Or should I say it could have been a huge factor in the outcome.

0. No mention of the shooter going to the floor on the drive at the beginning of the video? Looks like she was dragged down from behind on a lay up. Not sure what the C was looking at. The L is watching the ball.

1. No opinion.

2. The girl they put on the line was clearly not in the act of shooting.

3. I can't see any good reason for them to pow wow. I also can't see why the T closed on this.

My Take
 

1. He's out of position for sure (& very possibly ball watching). His thought could have been to move closer to the action since it was all on the other side of the court. He went too far.
2. That's a judgement call where we earn the big bucks. But, I don't believe so.
3. I have no clue. I don't know what the C could have added. Once the C joins the confab, who's watching the players? The L and the T seemed to have the situation and the call under control.
That's why it's good to watch ourselves on video and to learn and improve.

Everybody's Crazy 'Bout A Sharp Dressed Man ...
 

Here in the Constitution State, it's not common, but it's not rare either. We have some "big time" schools who make it to the state finals almost every year, whose coaches wear sweat suits. It looks like they're coaching at practice, not at a game, but they don't get paid to be a "fashion model". They get paid to win games, for their players to show good sportsmanship on the court, and for their players to graduate, and possibly move on to the next level. It used to bother me, now I realize that there are much more important things about being a good coach than about being a "fashion model". Just my evolving opinion.

Non-shooting foul.

But could the 2 shots been for the automatic bonus situation?

On The Ground ???
 

tomegun: Be careful with your wording. Most of us veterans know what you mean, but many rookie officials, coaches, players, and fans, might not. You can be in the act of shooting with both feet on the ground. In our local area, we've been discouraged from using such verbiage in describing whether, or not, a player was in the act of shooting.

I actually said it on purpose because many officials do call it on the ground/floor. You make a good point though because that is exactly the problem.

For those of you who say the girl was not in the act of shooting, can you explain why? I'm not so sure either way because the shot was awkward. The question I have is was she gathering the ball. From the camera angle, I can't tell for sure, but I think it is very close.

Notice the L signal no shot right after the foul. Could the C have come in to discuss a timing issue? Thumbs down on the sweats!

0. Looks like the shooter was perhaps trying to sell a foul and just plopped on the ground. From the video's angle (same as C, opposite of L) whatever minimal contact there was it did not effect her rhythm. Good job of C and L to pass on it, especially with less than 10 seconds in a one point championship game.

2. Double bonus?

3. As for the T closing, agreed. She should close a little just to be on top of the tense situation but she is only adding to the confusion by pointing to the white player on the ground. It looks like she is perhaps identifying the shooter. Unfortunately, to the fan/coach/observer it almost looks as if she is pointing to white as if she is calling a foul on white. Another miscue that adds to the confusion of the situation.

A couple other things that bothered me that haven't been mentioned.

C looked like he was way too antsy down the stretch of this game and he did not trust his partners. The ball watching on the play put him in the way of the game and took him out of position. His running in toward the conference, and doing most of the talking, left the players unwatched and made him screw up the switch for free throw administration. He should have been lead for this (assuming there isn't a NV exception). Then he came into the lane between tries to move a player down when the lead could easily have taken care of that. Looked way too excited.

L crept on the court during the rebounding and confusingly waved off the basket with one arm while the other was still in the air. Not sure why he came all the way to the table after a correct call. It was a 5th foul, but there is still no reason to allow the coach to walk to mid-court and have a conversation that doesn't involve the other coach.

I'm guessing T had a double whistle, but should have passed the call to L and ended up making a confusing extended point to the shooter. Maybe she wasn't sure what L had because of a weak preliminary signal.

I'm not sure any of the three were completely under control during this crunch time.

This is a great example of getting the call right, and still looking bad doing it.

1. That happens. Not often but it happens.

2. No, not at all.

3. I think time might have been the discussion. That is the only thing I can come up with.

Peace

Could it be that the T came in and had the extended discussion because she thought it was a PC foul on the shooter?? I don't have sound on my computer at work, so I can't tell if it was a double whistle or not, but I can see that as a possibility here.

Being a fashion model isn't important, but not looking like a bum is. I assume that coach is a teacher at the school. As a teacher he is paid to teach, enforce rules....and a bunch of other stuff. I would guess that unless that guy teaches gym then he is not allowed to wear a sweat suit while teaching. There are much more important things about being a good teacher than about being a fashion model but what the teacher wears is still important. Why is that changed for coaching a game?

Chalk it up to having too much time on my hands. I went back and had a closer look at when the camera panned to the scoreboard. You can briefly, but clearly see that the scoreboard shows 5 seconds on the clock, then it changes to .5 seconds. My money is on the discussion being about the proper time on the clock. That would account for the C coming across to talk. That would also account for the L going all the way to the table, and for the Gorman coach's interest.

Good catch on the time issue. I hadn't noticed that and it does explain a lot of the conferencing.

LDUB, I think that guy is a gal :eek:

When I say "step down", I'm really meaning do something besides come running into the play like he did. He could have stepped down, stepped up, or just stayed where he was to being with. He wasn't needed over there.

In all honesty, this crew looked like they were in over their heads. The more I watch it the worse it looks.

As for the attire thing. I just think it makes a coach look more professional and I think they command more respect when they dress the part. Sweats make them look like they're in a summer league or at practice.

Thanks. See post #12

According to the scoreboard both teams are in the bonus.

That's why the T was ID the shooter.

On another side note, how many of you have ever or would force your way into the team huddle and herd the team back onto the floor as the new L did before administering the free throws?

I noticed that too. I think the female official in this crew was the strongest but this is one thing she needs to stop doing immediately. I understand she was probably saying "It's not a timeout, let's get on the floor" but you can't be forcing your way in and pushing players. A step near the huddle and some firm words will do the trick.

That jumped out at me also. I can imagine grabbing a girls shoulder and shoving her away.

They may have all known what they were doing but sure looked sloppy, not to mention it being a championship game.

Nevada, is the the best of best out West:)

I went back and reviewed this, this looks really bad. Two other observations:
1) Reporting official is walking in his foul signals. In Indiana, they definitely want you to come to a complete stop.
2) The old T opposite should have become the new C opposite.

Good catch. See post #14 :D

Reviewing again, and I don't see any state patches at all unless I missed them.

Lead calls foul, fails to indicate what it was( we learn later a block) nor does indicate spot. Also fails to wave off basket initially. Could have trail made a call off camera? Hard to tell, although she doesn't come in to sell call if one was made, just points to I'm guessing the defender

The nonchalant walk to the table by lead I feel is a product of deer in headlights malaise. He looks dazed and confused.

Also catch where lead stands for first shot.

Wow...being a bit picky...

Not all states use patches. Perhaps that is the case in this video. I wish they'd eliminate them here.

He did waive it off, right after he blew the whistle....one armed...but still a waive off.

Trail came in and identified the shooter...as in "I've got your shooter".

The walk to the table could be just a sign of calmness and in control. Using his calmness to settle those around him.

One of my thoughts: His walk to the table most likely included several thoughts. First being, the timing issue. The C ran in in and had something to offer. As pointed out by Indianaref and someone else ;), the time was an issue and possibly the horn sounded after the call, idk. In addition, the offending player had 5 fouls. As all tables seem to do, the signals were coming and the L was trying to get his reporting correct while being given info for which he wasn't yet ready. I think he was pretty sure that he was gong to have to address the table.

I am also thinkning the C was the R. If not, he sure involved himself in a lot of "stuff" that couold have been handled without him.

All things being said, and 2 days of picking it apart, these officials got the calls right and looked right (to the general public) doing it. After all, it was a State Final and a crazy finish. I get nervous doing a big Conference game.

One more thought, the C, if he was the R, may have made the incorrect switch so he could stay close to the table (knowing all the issues and being the one with definite knowledge of time remaining) so he could easily help at the table (as he does) when needed. Not that the FED gives us that option.

My point: they got it right and we officials were able to learn a few things from the process. Great post tomegun!

Las Vegas gives an official some wiggle room for mechanics as long as the mechanics are consistent and clearly understood. I've had discussions with the instructional chair about this because of two hand reporting, walking and talking, etc. After some input, he came to the conclusion that he doesn't care as long as the official does the same thing the whole game. For instance, it I'm using two hands to report at the beginning of the game, I need to do it the whole game.

I'm going to ask her about this when I see her. I don't think it looks too good either. I'm pretty sure she knows both coaches well. That isn't an excuse though.

We don't have to wear patches here, thank God. Patches are horrible to me.
Someone else pointed this out, but he did waive off the basket. I guess you are wanting a block signal at the spot. That is something every state isn't required to do. If it was a block/charge situation I agree a signal might be in order, but in this case I don't think it is necessary.

The L was standing in the position where women's college officials (I believe) and NBA officials stand for the first shot. The L does do some small college ball.

If you look at the action when the clock was running it is obvious both the L and C are ball watching. Now, some schools of thought advocate that at this point in the game, but I would suggest they both work on their methods of getting angles on plays. Getting in the way is not something you want to do regularly.

BTW, our instructional chair, along with two other guys from Vegas are doing the Lakers' pre-season game tonight.

Holy 2009 Batman...

As Vintage Wine ...
 

It was a very good year.