Suggested Mechanic Change

[Rich]

Originally Posted by mj

Absolutely agree.

There is such a fascination with "locking down" with some officials, too. With HS mechanics, the official opposite ALWAYS has the last shot. If there's a rotation in a half-court set, the responsibility for the last shot DOES NOT CHANGE, so why the fascination with the T and C "locking down"?

Makes no sense to me -- maybe someone can enlighten me.

[mj]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

There is such a fascination with "locking down" with some officials, too. With HS mechanics, the official opposite ALWAYS has the last shot. If there's a rotation in a half-court set, the responsibility for the last shot DOES NOT CHANGE, so why the fascination with the T and C "locking down"?

Makes no sense to me -- maybe someone can enlighten me.

I don't understand this either but I've heard many times. It doesn't happen in my games....

[jeffpea]

the improvement that is required to solve the problem in the originally posted video, is one of judgement improvement - NOT mechanic improvement.

based on the unique circumstances of each game, i don't really think it matters whether it's the C or T - just agree on a guy and let him make the call...and trust he has better judgement than the trail in the OP video because you didn't need replay or the pause button to see that shot was released in time and should have counted.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

There is such a fascination with "locking down" with some officials, too. With HS mechanics, the official opposite ALWAYS has the last shot. If there's a rotation in a half-court set, the responsibility for the last shot DOES NOT CHANGE, so why the fascination with the T and C "locking down"?

Makes no sense to me -- maybe someone can enlighten me.

Here is the ONLY situation I've come up with that it could remotely be useful:

Lead (R1) switches towards the table (making the T (R2) the new C by default) in the waning moments of the contest. Simultaneously, the defense steals the ball and throws up a shot as the buzzer goes off. Only problem is that R2 didn't see R1 switch.

Well, according to mechanics (correct me if I'm wrong), had R1 stayed opposite table, he would be the new trail on the play (after the steal by the defense) and thus he would have the final shot. However, since R2 is still the C (because R1 switched tableside) it would be his call. But he may not have seen the switch.

I must say that I do not like locking down. Have I done it? Unfortunately my superior officials have decided to lock down in games and we did pregame it, so I have. But when I'm referee, we do not lock down. I officiate the final 5, 10, 15 seconds the same (just as crappy or excellent depending on how you look at it ) as I did the first 5, 10, 15 seconds.

-Josh

[Rich]

Originally Posted by jeffpea

the improvement that is required to solve the problem in the originally posted video, is one of judgement improvement - NOT mechanic improvement.

Bingo. QED.

[Judtech]

The only mechanic to be changed here (according to the announcers) would be to allow the use of courtside monitors.
Even though the announcers said it only went back 30 seconds, knowing it was there would anyone have gone over to sneak a peak and worry about the consequences later? THAT would have made it more interesting. Offiicials huddle, go to monitor, can't replay the the situation on the monitor, officials huddle and then .................

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Judtech

The only mechanic to be changed here (according to the announcers) would be to allow the use of courtside monitors.
Even though the announcers said it only went back 30 seconds, knowing it was there would anyone have gone over to sneak a peak and worry about the consequences later? THAT would have made it more interesting. Offiicials huddle, go to monitor, can't replay the the situation on the monitor, officials huddle and then .................

2-2-1 (note). Given that it's up to the states to decide whether to allow it, and there's no definition of "state championship series" provided by the Fed, I would say that change has already been made.

[jearef]

Wow. I really feel for the official who waved this off. I can't imagine a worse feeling after a game.

Assuming that the L and/or C had definite knowledge, I don't understand why one of them didn't go to the T and offer their information. I always cover this in pregame, because a similar thing happened to my closest friend. He waved off a ball that went in, and when he got to the locker room, his partner told him "it was definitely good". The film confirmed it. Why take that info to the locker room with you?

If it's a bang-banger that you have to watch four times on film to be sure, then you live and die with the T's call. In a play that is as obvious as this one seemed to be, partners have to help. Get the play right.

[GoodwillRef]

Originally Posted by chayce

Based on a play that occurred in a local high school game, there may be a better way to make sure this kind of mistake doesn't happen. Here is a link to the play:

YouTube - Last second shot denied by refs; fchs vs henry clay 2010

(you can also see the play from another angle at CKYSports.com - High School Sports Broadcast Network)

Observations:

1. Trail has responsibility for and does make the ruling on the last second shot.
2. Trail was also the longest distance away from the shot.
3. "C" no doubt had the best look; however, did not come to Trail after the signal.
4. Three person crew did not get together after the shot becaue "C" and "L" did not have absolute knowledge to share with "T".

Possible Suggestion:

I think last second shot coverage is an area that could be changed so that the official responsible for the shot is the official responsible for the primary out of which the shot is attempted. In this case, the shot would have been "C"'s all the way and would have eliminated the need for Trail to look through five players to the opposite block. Curious to see what you think about this coverage responsiblity...thanks.

Everyone has to have an opinion on a last second shot...especially one that is shot in the lane. The crew needs to come together and get the call right. This is why we get together during timeouts late in the game and discuss situations just like this.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

Everyone has to have an opinion on a last second shot...especially one that is shot in the lane. The crew needs to come together and get the call right. This is why we get together during timeouts late in the game and discuss situations just like this.

Everyone can have an opinion but there is only one that matters in the heat of the moment. It's the C/T opposite the table. If you can't trust your partner during that last second shot, you aren't a good team member. There is absolutely no reason to get together on a last second shot (unless your partner falls down and pokes himself in both eyes simultaneously).

-Josh

[Adam]

Originally Posted by jdmara

Everyone can have an opinion but there is only one that matters in the heat of the moment. It's the C/T opposite the table. If you can't trust your partner during that last second shot, you aren't a good team member. There is absolutely no reason to get together on a last second shot (unless your partner falls down and pokes himself in both eyes simultaneously).

-Josh

I agree. I don't see any reason to have any more than two sets of eyes on that last second shot; and if it's in the primary of the official with last shot responsibility, there should only be one set of eyes on it.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I agree. I don't see any reason to have any more than two sets of eyes on that last second shot; and if it's in the primary of the official with last shot responsibility, there should only be one set of eyes on it.

I worked a game this season with 2 officials who both have "D3 National Championship" on their resumes'. The C opposite table had a last second shot in his primary at the end of the first half. He did not wave off the shot even though it came after the buzzer. The shot was missed so no big deal.

In the locker room at halftime we discussed the play and the C said he got focused on a possible foul and asked if he got it right as far as not waving the shot off. Both I (Trail tableside) and the Lead said it was clearly released after the horn. The C said "then I hope you 2 would have came to me had the shot gone in because we all should have an opinion on a last second shot". The Lead pretty much echoed those sentiments.

So, there are different schools of thought on the matter. Wear the appropriate toga is what I say.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I worked a game this season with 2 officials who both have "D3 National Championship" on their resumes'. The C opposite table had a last second shot in his primary at the end of the first half. He did not wave off the shot even though it came after the buzzer. The shot was missed so no big deal.

In the locker room at halftime we discussed the play and the C said he got focused on a possible foul and asked if he got it right as far as not waving the shot off. Both I (Trail tableside) and the Lead said it was clearly released after the horn. The C said "then I hope you 2 would have came to me had the shot gone in because we all should have an opinion on a last second shot". The Lead pretty much echoed those sentiments.

So, there are different schools of thought on the matter. Wear the appropriate toga is what I say.

I understand the concept but what I don't understand is how it's ever going to look like you know what the heck you're doing if you wave off a basket, then get together and count it. I don't think that this situation is equivalent with an out-of-bounds call that you are 110% that the lead got wrong....People make mistakes and sometimes we have to live with those mistakes.

-Josh

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by jdmara

I understand the concept but what I don't understand is how it's ever going to look like you know what the heck you're doing if you wave off a basket, then get together and count it. I don't think that this situation is equivalent with an out-of-bounds call that you are 110% that the lead got wrong....People make mistakes and sometimes we have to live with those mistakes.

-Josh

No, this not one we live with. Who cares what it looks like aesthetically, what's important in a game deciding situation is whether or not the crew got the call right. This is far more important that a random OOB call.

We all saw the thread of the HS play-off game at Eastern Kentucky. If one of the other crew members had come in and told the Trail that the shot was obviously released in time and the Trail changed his called and counted the basket the film would have supported the decision and the right team would have advanced. And the CREW would have been lauded for getting the call right.

[jalons]

Originally Posted by jdmara

Everyone can have an opinion but there is only one that matters in the heat of the moment. It's the C/T opposite the table. If you can't trust your partner during that last second shot, you aren't a good team member. There is absolutely no reason to get together on a last second shot (unless your partner falls down and pokes himself in both eyes simultaneously).

-Josh

So if you are the C in the OP and have 100% knowledge that the shot was released in time and should count, you are going to keep that information from your partner because you want to be a good team member? If you have information in this instance, you need to share it. I wouldn't want my name associated with the CREW who screwed that up. You can always count on an opinion from me on a last second shot and I would expect the same from my partners, just in case......