Whistle for a sub?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I cut if off right there. A2 doesn't get in. Team A already made a substitution and Team B countered. We are certainly ready to play by now.
So A2 has to wait, unless there is an injury or some other oddity.

What if your brethren down south don't agree with this arbitrary philosophy?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What if your brethren down south don't agree with this arbitrary philosophy?

See post #89.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Your brethren up North have agreed to teach to blow the whistle when bringing in subs just as stated in the NFHS manual. It would be appreciated if you would teach it that way in the South too, so that we are all on the same page when it comes time to work together at the State Tournament.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I cut if off right there. A2 doesn't get in. Team A already made a substitution and Team B countered. We are certainly ready to play by now.
So A2 has to wait, unless there is an injury or some other oddity.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What if your brethren down south don't agree with this arbitrary philosophy?

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

See post #89.

I know what you think JR, I'm interested in what Nevada thinks.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I know what you think JR, I'm interested in what Nevada thinks.

I'll start popping the popcorn.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do not think it is necessary. Which is why I do not do it all the time. Can it be a useful tool? Of course. And no I do not follow NF mechanics and do not feel everything the NF comes up with is necessary. I feel it is an option and can be used if you need to. But many times good partners do not need a whistle at all.

Peace

I can dig it.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What if your brethren down south don't agree with this arbitrary philosophy?

The brethren down south are concerned with improving our product first and foremost. After that, we are concerned with doing things that make (common) sense so we can focus on improving our product.

I sent our rules interpreter (we have one of those in addition to the instructional chair) an email and he agrees with me about the whistle. We will use it when necessary, but not all the time.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I sent our rules interpreter (we have one of those in addition to the instructional chair) an email and he agrees with me about the whistle. We will use it when necessary, but not all the time.

What does a RULES interpreter have to do with standardizing mechanics?

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

What does a RULES interpreter have to do with standardizing mechanics?

In this case he has knowledge of what the NFHS really wants, he has many years as an official and the instructional chair respects his opinion.

Rich, common sense really has to be a part of what we do in our area because our goal is to improve the product - get in position and call plays correctly. I will be the first to say I care more about communication than things like blowing a whistle on a sub, using two hands to report or using the stop clock mechanic before giving a direction. My question is, does official X communicate well? If the answer is yes, then let's focus more on getting more plays right. I have sat in meetings in three different regions of the country - 5 high school associations. The thing they have in common is that they all have referees who talk a good game, but cannot officiate their way out of a paper bag! My experience tells me that most of those officials want to spend 95% of the time on small details that don't matter and 5% of the time talking about things that will help them call a better game. Plus, we get caught in a culture where we don't have enough engaged officials versus officials who do more harm than good. Will we (Southern Nevada) make huge improvements this season? I don't know, but we are going to try.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by tomegun

In this case he has knowledge of what the NFHS really wants, he has many years as an official and the instructional chair respects his opinion.

Rich, common sense really has to be a part of what we do in our area because our goal is to improve the product - get in position and call plays correctly. I will be the first to say I care more about communication than things like blowing a whistle on a sub, using two hands to report or using the stop clock mechanic before giving a direction. My question is, does official X communicate well? If the answer is yes, then let's focus more on getting more plays right. I have sat in meetings in three different regions of the country - 5 high school associations. The thing they have in common is that they all have referees who talk a good game, but cannot officiate their way out of a paper bag! My experience tells me that most of those officials want to spend 95% of the time on small details that don't matter and 5% of the time talking about things that will help them call a better game. Plus, we get caught in a culture where we don't have enough engaged officials versus officials who do more harm than good. Will we (Southern Nevada) make huge improvements this season? I don't know, but we are going to try.

I don't disagree with you. I am a firm believer that play-calling is 90% of the deal for officials and I spend most of my time worrying about getting the right position and the right look and the right philosophy to make proper decisions on the court.

That said, why can't officials focus on that *and* get the mechanics right, too?

Last summer I went to a camp where I was told up front that "this is a HS camp, we will use HS mechanics." I hadn't raised my hand 5 times in 3 years before pointing a direction and still got some darned good assignments. I took it as a challenge (and I didn't want to be noticed for something so silly) and didn't miss a single "stop clock" the entire weekend and was *still* noticed (in a positive way) for my play calling.

So while I'm not against what you say, I'll ask again -- why can't officials do both?

[tref]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

So while I'm not against what you say, I'll ask again -- why can't officials do both?

If officials that work NCAA & D-League games are disciplined enough to use proper mechanics from game to game, so should we.

[CLH]

Originally Posted by tref

If officials that work NCAA & D-League games are disciplined enough to use proper mechanics from game to game, so should we.

My smart@$$ comment for the day: "ok, pay me what thoase leagues pay me and I will!" Ok, I'm done, thanks for the opportunity!

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I don't disagree with you. I am a firm believer that play-calling is 90% of the deal for officials and I spend most of my time worrying about getting the right position and the right look and the right philosophy to make proper decisions on the court.

That said, why can't officials focus on that *and* get the mechanics right, too?

Last summer I went to a camp where I was told up front that "this is a HS camp, we will use HS mechanics." I hadn't raised my hand 5 times in 3 years before pointing a direction and still got some darned good assignments. I took it as a challenge (and I didn't want to be noticed for something so silly) and didn't miss a single "stop clock" the entire weekend and was *still* noticed (in a positive way) for my play calling.

So while I'm not against what you say, I'll ask again -- why can't officials do both?

In a perfect world they can, but either I have the worst luck or high school officials can't do both (half serious, half kidding). Let me ask you this, would you ding an official who looks good, but doesn't use mechanics by the book versus an official who uses sloppy mechanics by the book?

I failed to mention, Las Vegas has always been a liberal area when it comes to mechanics. I started years ago in phoenix and we had to do everything precisely by the book. That actually helped me when I got to Vegas - I had fundamentally sound mechanics to start with.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by tomegun

Let me ask you this, would you ding an official who looks good, but doesn't use mechanics by the book versus an official who uses sloppy mechanics by the book?

I'd ding both of 'em. There's no excuse for either imo. If you want uniformity in your area, it's up to YOU to set the parameters of what that uniformity should be and then apply those parameters. If you're not doing so, why evaluate people in the first place?

I could care less what parameters you set up locally, Tom. As long as everybody in your area is trying to do the same thing, great. But, as Nevada said, you may have a problem when your officials go outside your area. However, imo that ain't really a biggie either. A good pre-game takes care of most of those problems.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

So while I'm not against what you say, I'll ask again -- why can't officials do both?

Any official who has some experience and an IQ higher than a grape should be able to learn and use the prescribed mechanics for the level they're working imo. And it ain't that difficult to find out the prescribed mechanics in your area also. You ask.

JMO.