Throw-in Reset

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I'll answer this each and every time regardless of what level. This assumes I haven't already informed the thrower to whether or not it is a designated spot throw-in.

What is the rationale for not answering this simple question?

I don't ignore the question. What I meant by a "teaching moment" was, if the violation happens at a lower level, would you stop the game, re-iterate the rule, and then go on? Or just call the violation, even after saying "Hold your spot"

[APG]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

I don't ignore the question. What I meant by a "teaching moment" was, if the violation happens at a lower level, would you stop the game, re-iterate the rule, and then go on? Or just call the violation, even after saying "Hold your spot"

Gotcha. I'd probably go ahead and call the violation, especially if I told the thrower what type of throw-in it was. You better believe they'll know the rule after you call the violation haha

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

I don't ignore the question. What I meant by a "teaching moment" was, if the violation happens at a lower level, would you stop the game, re-iterate the rule, and then go on? Or just call the violation, even after saying "Hold your spot"

Well, you need to "stop the game" to call the violation anyway, and the violation includes (or should include) a verbal "left the spot" (or similar), I'm not sure what else there is to say.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

What I meant by a "teaching moment" was, if the violation happens at a lower level, would you stop the game, re-iterate the rule, and then go on?

Doesn't "re-iterate" and "iterate mean the same thing?

Does anyone care?

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Doesn't "re-iterate" and "iterate mean the same thing?

Does anyone care?

That ain't no double negative

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Doesn't "re-iterate" and "iterate mean the same thing?

Does anyone care?

Yes, kinda like ravel and unravel.

And in my experience, no, nobody cares.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Yes, kinda like ravel and unravel.

Flammable and inflammable.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Flammable and inflammable.

"Boy, I won't make that mistake again!" -- Woody from Cheers.

I don't see it as coaching to tell the players (and I always make sure both teams know) whether it's a "spot" or "you can run". And when the defense comes right up to the boundary line, I say "You can move back, but not side to side". I don't want the kid to hear "spot" and think, he has to stand there with the defender in his face.

[justacoach]

Originally Posted by stiffler3492

I don't ignore the question. What I meant by a "teaching moment" was, if the violation happens at a lower level, would you stop the game, re-iterate the rule, and then go on? Or just call the violation, even after saying "Hold your spot"

"Hold your spot"?? Does this mean you'll call a violation if they move? Not valid as a 'teaching moment', IMO. Verges on coaching a player, which is above our pay grade!
Just plain old "Spot" does the trick as well as "2" on free throws or "Blue" on throw in. No need for superfulous, er, superflus, sperlious.....er...superfluous
unnecessary verbiage.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by justacoach

"Hold your spot"?? Does this mean you'll call a violation if they move? Not valid as a 'teaching moment', IMO. Verges on coaching a player, which is above our pay grade!
Just plain old "Spot" does the trick as well as "2" on free throws or "Blue" on throw in. No need for superfluous, er, superflus, sperlious.....er...superfluous
unnecessary verbiage.

You calling for your dog?

You're talking to a specific player, not making a call. Being a little more conversational is not a bad thing.

I either tell the player "You can run the line" or "You have to throw from this spot", or "Its a spot throwin". I want them to understand what I'm adminstering....not just communicate the minimum and tag them with a call if they don't grasp it.

While "2" on the FTs might be sufficient, "2(3) shots" provides a confirmation of the number with the plural "shots" vs. "1 shot" or "1 and 1" ..... This allows for a little higher chance that everyone gets the information. This is completely different than something like "I've got a foul on while number 42 with a block" where the extra words are truly a waste.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

You calling for your dog?

You're talking to a specific player, not making a call. Being a little more conversational is not a bad thing.

I either tell the player "You can run the line" or "You have to throw from this spot", or "Its a spot throwin". I want them to understand what I'm adminstering....not just communicate the minimum and tag them with a call if they don't grasp it.

While "2" on the FTs might be sufficient, "2(3) shots" provides a confirmation of the number with the plural "shots" vs. "1 shot" or "1 and 1" ..... This allows for a little higher chance that everyone gets the information. This is completely different than something like "I've got a foul on while number 42 with a block" where the extra words are truly a waste.

I've cut my FT words down to "1," "2," or "3," but I agree adding the word "shots" isn't really an issue. I used to have the nasty habit of adding something like, "this one's live" or "relax on the first one" as if they didn't know.

On the throw-ins, I do the same as you. "Here's your spot," (accompanied by a point to the spot) or "You can run the line."