NFHS - FT mechanic rational?

[eyezen]

Can anyone explain the rational of watching the players on the opposite lane line?

[BktBallRef]

So you have the proper angle to make the call if one of those player breaks the FT lane plane or touches the lane before the ball hits the rim/backboard.

[Back In The Saddle]

That's the rationale for watching across. The rationale for not watching across is that after watching for violations you have to immediately shift your focus back to your own side to watch for contact, only by then the action has already begun and you're playing catch up. I pregame that my partner and I watch our own sides for violations and fouls. What can I say? I'm a rebel.

[eyezen]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

So you have the proper angle to make the call if one of those player breaks the FT lane plane or touches the lane before the ball hits the rim/backboard.

hmmm. unless I am right on the lane line I don't know how I would see for 100% sure that the plane was broke.

Since we're not right on the lane line, then I don't see (no pun intended) what is different from looking at the front of the players (opposite) or looking at the back of the player (same side). And I sure can tell if the touched the lane.

I'm with BITS on this one.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

What can I say? I'm a rebel.

No your not. "Johnny Yuma was a rebel. He roamed through the West."

Back In The Saddle: Do you carry a double-barreled shotgun with a sawed-off stock and barrel?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by eyezen

Can anyone explain the rational of watching the players on the opposite lane line?

It hasn't always been this way. I may be a little fuzzy on this, my manuals only go back fourteen years, I've been doing this for twenty-nine years, and a few years ago we switched from NFHS mechanics, to IAABO mechanics, but this is what I recall.

Once upon a time, in a land far away, we were responsible only for our side of the lane. One thing I know for sure is that once we became responsible for the opposite side of the lane, we were responsible for the entire opposite side of the lane, and not, in any way responsible for our side of the lane.

Now as the lead, we have the first lane space on our side, and the entire opposite side of the lane. As the trail, we have the opposite side of the lane, except the first lane space. I wish the NFHS, or IAABO, would allow us to just watch one entire side, and not have us watch "fractions" of a side, and I don't care if it's the entire opposite side, like we did a few years ago, or the entire same side, like we did once upon a time, in a land far away.

Can one of you veterans confirm my recollection of same side responsibilities, or have I just described a fictitious fairy tale?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by eyezen

hmmm. unless I am right on the lane line I don't know how I would see for 100% sure that the plane was broke.

It's a violation to break the lane with your foot. But in 20 years of calling, every player I've ever seen do this put his foot down in the lane. If you can't make that call, then you should probably hang'em up.

Since we're not right on the lane line, then I don't see (no pun intended) what is different from looking at the front of the players (opposite) or looking at the back of the player (same side). And I sure can tell if the touched the lane.

There's no way you can know if the plane is broken by standing behind the line on your side. It goes against everything that's ever been taught with regard to getting the proper angle. When you administer a throw-in, I guess you stand behind the thrower to know whetehr he's broken the boundary plane or not.

I'm with BITS on this one.

Oh well, that just means you're both wrong. If you can't get wide enough to see the players you're responsible for during the FT and make a foul call after restrictions, you might won't to get your feet out of the concrete and move.

Personally, I don't limit myself to one side of the lane or the other on rebounding action. I get an angle where I can see the entire play. I'll yield to my partner if he makes the call but I'm not going to ignore the foul.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I wish the NFHS, or IAABO, would allow us to just watch one entire side, and not have us watch "fractions" of a side, and I don't care if it's the entire opposite side, like we did a few years ago, or the entire same side, like we did once upon a time, in a land far away.

Ah, Billy...that is the mechanic. Since there' no longer a player in the first space, you are now responsible for the entire opposite side.

[eyezen]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Ah, Billy...that is the mechanic. Since there' no longer a player in the first space, you are now responsible for the entire opposite side.

Not by the book its not see page 58

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by eyezen

Not by the book its not see page 58

Then possibly that's a state change, because that's what we were told at our state clinic this past week. We did not receive an Officials Manual this year.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

I don't limit myself to one side of the lane or the other on rebounding action. I get an angle where I can see the entire play. I'll yield to my partner if he makes the call but I'm not going to ignore the foul.

Would you limit yourself to one side of the lane or the other on a lane line violation that you're 100% sure occurred? Let's say that you're the trail, watching the free thrower, and the opposite side of the lane, except for the first spot, and your partner, in the lead position, passes on a 100% for sure violation by the player in that first marked lane space that you observe? Or, as the lead, you observe a 100% for sure violation by a player in the second marked lane space on your side, that your partner, as the trail passes on? Inquiring minds want to know.

[eyezen]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Then you must not be very good.

It's a violation to break the lane with your foot. But in 20 years of calling, every player I've ever seen do this put his foot down in the lane. If you can't make that call, then you should probably hang'em up.


There's no way you can know if the plane is broken by standing behind the line on your side. It goes against everything that's ever been taught with regard to getting the proper angle. When you administer a throw-in, I guess you stand behind the thrower to know whetehr he's broken the boundary plane or not.


Oh well, that just means you're both wrong. If you can't get wide enough to see the players you're responsible for during the FT and make a foul call after restrictions, you might won't to get your feet out of the concrete and move.

Personally, I don't limit myself to one side of the lane or the other on rebounding action. I get an angle where I can see the entire play. I'll yield to my partner if he makes the call but I'm not going to ignore the foul.

Sorry I forgot to add blue font, of course I'm not advocating needing to stand right on the line. My OP originally was trying to find the rational for looking opposite, when in NCAAM they stay the same side. Why the difference? You're right I must not be very good.

[eyezen]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Then possibly that's a state change, because that's what we were told at our state clinic this past week. We did not receive an Officials Manual this year.

NFHS officials manual 2009-2011

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Would you limit yourself to one side of the lane or the other on a lane line violation that you're 100% sure occurred? Let's say that you're the trail, watching the free thrower, and the opposite side of the lane, except for the first spot, and your partner, in the lead position, passes on a 100% for sure violation by the player in that first marked lane space that you observe? Or, as the lead, you observe a 100% for sure violation by a player in the second marked lane space on your side, that your partner, as the trail passes on? Inquiring minds want to know.

If I'm not going to pass on the foul, why would I pass on a violation?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by eyezen

Sorry I forgot to add blue font, of course I'm not advocating needing to stand right on the line. My OP originally was trying to find the rational for looking opposite, when in NCAAM they stay the same side. Why the difference? You're right I must not be very good.

Yes, in the OP you were. In your reply to me, you were indicating your disagreement with the mechanic.

Yes, I'm aware you were referring to the 2009-20011 Officials Manual. They doesn't change the fact I didn't get one or what we were told at our state clinic.

BTW, it's not rational, it's rationale.