Words can't describe.... this video.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by CMHCoachNRef

#3, I want to be clear that I am NOT defending the coach's actions in any way. At the same time, even though the video is not real clear, the defender certainly looked like he got a lot more than ball (notice the signal being given by the lead). The bench had an awfully good look at the play.

Let's see...

The head coach that was complaining was sitting at the end of his bench which was closest to the other team's basket, somewhere around the second lane space. The foul that he wanted called occurred all the way across the court appriximately at around the top of the 3-point arc.

Let's do the math.....

It's 50 feet across the court plus another few feet from the bench.

From where the coach was sitting, it would be about 54 feet down the court at the other end.

Sooooo....54 feet down and 50 feet across...square the hypotenuse...round off....deduct 2 ....add 6 inches for the Ron Jeremy(tm) effect.....and it comes out to occurring one helluva long way away from the coach.

Yup, the FAR bench had a great look at the steal.

You really do think like a coach, don't you?

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Let's see...

The head coach that was complaining was sitting at the end of his bench which was closest to the other team's basket, somewhere around the second lane space. The foul that he wanted called occurred all the way across the court appriximately at around the top of the 3-point arc.

Let's do the math.....

It's 50 feet across the court plus another few feet from the bench.

From where the coach was sitting, it would be about 54 feet down the court at the other end.

Sooooo....54 feet down and 50 feet across...square the hypotenuse...round off....deduct 2 ....add 6 inches for the Ron Jeremy(tm) effect.....and it comes out to occurring one helluva long way away from the coach.

Yup, the FAR bench had a great look at the steal.

You really do think like a coach, don't you?

JR,
Did not say the "head coach", I said the bench -- which was much closer to the play than 54 feet -- more like 25 feet. Appeared to have a better angle than the official on this play.

Probably a little.

[Matt S.]

Let me preface this by saying I don't in any way condone what the coach did, and both T's appear warranted.

It 'appears' to me that the official who passed on the steal call, and didn't issue the T, looks to be a lot younger than the official who T'd the coach-hence the veteran taking care of business.

Secondly, I want you to look at the opposite side official's positioning-he's coming up court as trial, but is running past the play-why on earth would he try and work 'inside out' as a hustling trail in transition??? Not saying he got the call right or wrong, but he certainly doesn't appear to have the best angle on the play...

Thoughts?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Matt S.

Let me preface this by saying I don't in any way condone what the coach did, and both T's appear warranted.

It 'appears' to me that the official who passed on the steal call, and didn't issue the T, looks to be a lot younger than the official who T'd the coach-hence the veteran taking care of business.

Secondly, I want you to look at the opposite side official's positioning-he's coming up court as trial, but is running past the play-why on earth would he try and work 'inside out' as a hustling trail in transition??? Not saying he got the call right or wrong, but he certainly doesn't appear to have the best angle on the play...

Thoughts?

I thought the trail over-ran the play, considering where the ball ended up. On the strip/steal, if you freeze it, the T is in the worst possible spot to officiate the steal and see if there's a whole lotta arm along with the ball.

Yet, these types of plays happen every game, especially with a lot of running and transition play. The coach's reaction is completely inappropriate and if I was the official getting that, he would've been whacked a lot quicker.

On the second play, I think the official giving the gator chop is just throwing fuel on the fire. Why signal anything? The lack of a whistle tells me everything I need to know.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

On the second play, I think the official giving the gator chop is just throwing fuel on the fire. Why signal anything? The lack of a whistle tells me everything I need to know.

I disagree with you on this. If you have no whistle it does not matter. Giving a signal does clarify what he saw and why he did not make the call. It might not be authorized, but we used to give a single for kicking the ball and that was at one time not authorized, but still illegal to kick the ball. I get questions all the time when I do not call a foul (like the one I just posted) and I do not give a signal it does not take away the opportunity to for them to say something. Actually I have started saying to coaches, "If you did not hear a whistle, we must not have thought it was a foul."

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I disagree with you on this. If you have no whistle it does not matter. Giving a signal does clarify what he saw and why he did not make the call. It might not be authorized, but we used to give a single for kicking the ball and that was at one time not authorized, but still illegal to kick the ball. I get questions all the time when I do not call a foul (like the one I just posted) and I do not give a signal it does not take away the opportunity to for them to say something. Actually I have started saying to coaches, "If you did not hear a whistle, we must not have thought it was a foul."

Peace

All I said was that in this particular case it was like adding fuel to the fire. Feel free to disagree.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

All I said was that in this particular case it was like adding fuel to the fire. Feel free to disagree.

I am simply saying that I do not think it matters. In this case or any case the coach seemed to be to be geared up and has an anger problem. I have never seen a coach push his own players out of the way like they were adults to get at an official for anything. He would have been ejected by me long before the second T anyway.

Peace

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Giving a signal does clarify what he saw and why he did not make the call. It might not be authorized, but we used to give a single for kicking the ball and that was at one time not authorized, but still illegal to kick the ball.

This remark pertains to the "alligator chop" to signal that the official saw a block rather than a foul.

I know that this topic has been discussed, but I wanted to respond to this thought. NFHS will not authorize the chop, because in the season it did so the number of "blops" (block/chop?) or foul/no-foul double calls would increase 100-fold.

It's one thing if one official passes on a foul and another calls it. It's quite another to have conflicting signals on a play. The latter looks bad, IMO.

Even apart from the question of whether we need a signal for a no-call, for this reason using the "chop" is bad mechanics.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by mbyron

This remark pertains to the "alligator chop" to signal that the official saw a block rather than a foul.

I know that this topic has been discussed, but I wanted to respond to this thought. NFHS will not authorize the chop, because in the season it did so the number of "blops" (block/chop?) or foul/no-foul double calls would increase 100-fold.

It's one thing if one official passes on a foul and another calls it. It's quite another to have conflicting signals on a play. The latter looks bad, IMO.

Even apart from the question of whether we need a signal for a no-call, for this reason using the "chop" is bad mechanics.

Well I am not talking about this from a NF perspective. Not all states use NF mechanics like my state does not (to the letter that is). I am simply stating that the signal alone is not a bad signal. When it is used can be. I have no problem if someone is using this as clarification. I have used it in other situations when no possibility of another call is at issue. In other words, I have used it when the play in question is completely over. I use the tip signal on out of bounds calls often to clarify what I saw. I really do not care if the NF or anyone else likes it; I am communicating something to everyone without having to yell across the court.

Peace

[Anchor]

Nobody has mentioned the most obvious yet--the defender in the second video is clearly jumping towards the shooter. In so doing, having given up any semblance of a legal guarding position any contact (of which there is plenty) can be considered a foul. Did he gain an advantage? The official signaling that he capped the ball makes me think he gained a fairly significant advantage.

[bbcof83]

This is not the point of this video being posted, I know. The coach was 100% deserved in his two Ts. Wanted to bring something else up that I don't think anyone has mentioned.

I'm not passing judgment and I know some people aren't going to like this but I believe a foul may have been missed. Looking at the 2nd video, when the kid pulls up for 3 on the fast break, notice how the ball continues upward. I'm no scientist but I have to believe basic physics tells us if the defender's hand is slapping down and the shooter is bringing the ball up, if the ball is contacted, that ball should be forced down or at least slow it's ascent. It goes about 12 feet in the air. Also, looks as if the shooter's left hand goes down while the ball and right arm continue up.

I have to believe there was some contact here and if there's any contact from a defender from behind we have a foul.

Thoughts?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bbcof83

This is not the point of this video being posted, I know. The coach was 100% deserved in his two Ts. Wanted to bring something else up that I don't think anyone has mentioned.

I'm not passing judgment and I know some people aren't going to like this but I believe a foul may have been missed. Looking at the 2nd video, when the kid pulls up for 3 on the fast break, notice how the ball continues upward. I'm no scientist but I have to believe basic physics tells us if the defender's hand is slapping down and the shooter is bringing the ball up, if the ball is contacted, that ball should be forced down or at least slow it's ascent. It goes about 12 feet in the air. Also, looks as if the shooter's left hand goes down while the ball and right arm continue up.

I have to believe there was some contact here and if there's any contact from a defender from behind we have a foul.

Thoughts?

Certainly could be true....and it also could possibly be true that there was a foul missed at the other end before the first "T".

But a missed call can never excuse the behavior that the coach exhibited imo.

There isn't a one of us that hasn't missed a call at some time. And I can guarantee that NO official ever wanted to miss a call either. And nobody feels worse that the official who just found out that he had missed a call. All you can do is see if you can learn something from it and then just move on to the next call.

Most coaches know that also.....will grumble a bit...and then move on too. And that's the way it should be.

Jmo.....

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by bbcof83

This is not the point of this video being posted, I know. The coach was 100% deserved in his two Ts. Wanted to bring something else up that I don't think anyone has mentioned.

I'm not passing judgment and I know some people aren't going to like this but I believe a foul may have been missed. Looking at the 2nd video, when the kid pulls up for 3 on the fast break, notice how the ball continues upward. I'm no scientist but I have to believe basic physics tells us if the defender's hand is slapping down and the shooter is bringing the ball up, if the ball is contacted, that ball should be forced down or at least slow it's ascent. It goes about 12 feet in the air. Also, looks as if the shooter's left hand goes down while the ball and right arm continue up.

I have to believe there was some contact here and if there's any contact from a defender from behind we have a foul.

Thoughts?

Agreed. I think that there was a foul on this play. I also find it interesting that he does not signal that the shot is a 3 point attempt or not (certainly the trail is not in position to see the play). The shot was close enough that some indication should have been made by the lead.

The signal he is giving does not appear to be the "foul tip" signal, but rather a signal that I typically only see used for a held ball when the shooter was unable to release the ball for a try. The signal indicates that a hand was on top of the ball preventing the upward movement for a shot. In Central Ohio, I only see that hand signal immediately after a held ball signal is given on such a try.

As you point out, the ball goes 12 feet into the air, the shooter's right hand continues upward, yet his left hand goes down toward the floor. If the defender had gotten on top of the ball or otherwise slowed the ball down, the shooter's shooting hand (RIGHT HAND) should have gone downward since it would have been behind and under the ball, not the hand that would have been on the side of the ball.

None of this excuses the actions of the coach -- particularly in the first video as we have no idea what he said in the second one.

[Adam]

It looked to me like the shooter in the 2nd video was well inside the arc.

[bbcof83]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It looked to me like the shooter in the 2nd video was well inside the arc.

No, definitely outside the arc.