Spot OOB violation mechanic
 

What is the proper mechanic for Violation of the OOB spot throw in by player running along the end line?

Point to spot and move your arm parallel to end line?

Had one yesterday. I just whistled, said "Throw-in violation", and pointed the other way.

Stiffler:

A good example of keeping it short and simple unlike many of my posts.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. I hope you are making good money from your American Pie movie residuals. :D

Right or wrong, this is what I do.

Use NFHS Signal #26- designated spot violation...of course, of course....

I knew it was in there somewhere. Just had a brain f..t and couldn't remember. I am going to enjoy winning this beer bet.

Let me guess - someone told you that you should use the traveling signal, and now owes you a beer?!!?

Yes, Informed the "older timer" than I that there is no traveling out of bounds. I can taste it now, but what goes around comes around. --maybe a real good micro brew--- yes, that sounds very tasty

Or the IAABO mechanic on page 198

Fixed it for ya.

"Or" ain't an option for the great majority of officials who are non-IAABO members.

Is the IAABO mechanic different than the NFHS signal?

Pretty much the same ... I guess it depends on how you look at the cartoon man :cool:

From The IAABO Manual ...
 

http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5246/...8617c592_m.jpg

I just realized something. For thirty years I've been giving the wrong signal for a five second throwin violation. I've always given the five finger open hand signal, the same signal we use for a five second closely guarded violation. I've only used the signal above for designated spot, or throwin player onto the court, throwin violations. According to the IAABO manual were supposed to give the same signal, above, for all throw in violations.

Comments?

Maybe use the official Fed mechanic followed by an open hand "5 count" solely for the benefit of the coach who's player committed the violation since he/she probably won't have a clue what the proper mechanic is communicating?

I just realized something. You think waaaaaaaay too much.

See NFHS signal 24.

Stupid IAABO Mechanics ...
 

Similar signal in the IAABO mechanics manual says "Five Seconds Closely Guarded". There is no "Five Second Violation" (like NFHS Signal 24) in the IAABO manual.

Doesn't mean you're wrong, Billy. Means some IAABO rules-making monkey is wrong, trying to improve on something that didn't need improving in the first place. The open-handed 5 finger signal has been de rigeur everywhere on a throw-in time violation as long as I've been around afaik. The purpose of any signal is tell everybody in the gym what you just called. And NFHS signal #24 does that in this case. Using signal #26 instead...like IAABO wants you too...will just confuse everbody in the gym, including your partners. Nobody will have a clue whether you called a 5-second violation or a spot violation.

Stoopid IAABO rules-making monkeys!

If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It ...
 

Thus the title of my post previous post: Stupid IAABO Mechanics ...

Just what was the problem with IAABO continuing to use NFHS mechanics anyway?

http://ts4.mm.bing.net/images/thumbn...f721&index=ch1

That's what's confusing to me also, Billy. I thought they'd use the same signals at least. They're standard and have been around a long time.

Just for my own edification, I e-mailed a nameless IAABO board interpreter whose knowledge of the game and rules I have a very deep respect for about this. Had an initial response and just waiting for his reply to some follow-up questions. Wierd.

Help is on the way, Billy
 

The first responses from the inquiries that I made to an esteemed IAABO rules interpreter that I know...who e-mailed some fellow esteemed IAABO rules interpreters....is that your IAABO signal #24 is labelled wrong and should be labelled the same as the NFHS signal #24...i.e. 5 second violation. They also said that they teach and use the 5 finger open-handed signal( signal #24) for all 5-second throw-in violations.

I'm awaiting further responses.

I figured this was simply an editorial mistake. I've never been corrected for using #24 for this violation.

That seems to be the consensus so far from several IAABO rules interpreter I've talked to. And anything and everything that the one esteemed interpreter has ever told me I know I can take to the bank. Well almost everything. Gotta leave out beisbol. :)

Everyone has their weakness. For some, it's baseball. For others, it might be acorns. For a select few, it's both.

And the consensus from the IAABO interpreters...including my esteemed friend and another board interpreter who has served on the NFHS rules committee...is that it's a typo, the IAABO signal should be labelled the same as the NFHS signal and it should be used for 5 second throw-in violations, as always.

Looks like a mountain out of a molehill, Billy. :)

My thanks to the IAABO board interpreters who post here.

And I'm Not Going To Take This Any More ...
 

IAABO manuals, with this typo, went out to 200 local boards spanning 38 states and 11 foreign counties. Don't they have an editor? Didn't they ever hear about something that I learned in elementary school? It's called proofreading.

Billy, do you really think more than 10 people in all those states (I'm assuming the FIBA countries got the FIBA version) noticed this before you posted it here?

And do you really think more than 1 of them actually thought to change the way he signals this violation based on that typo?

And do you really think his supervisor and rules interpreter did anything except slap him across the BillyMac and tell him to stop thinking so much?

The Peter Principle ...
 

I don't care if more, or less, than ten people saw this, either before, or after, me. I have little tolerance for incompetence. And the higher that I go up the "food chain", the less I tolerate it. If I'm going to send out something to a few people, I'll give it a quick proofread. If I'm going to send something out to thousands of people, then not only will I give it a thorough proofreading, but I'll have a few others give it a thorough proofread it as well. IAABO successfully used NFHS mechanics for many, many years. The changeover to IAABO mechanics, now several years old, in my opinion, is still a mess. I still don't know why they made the change in the first place.

If only everybody else were as thorough and detail-oriented. You're truly an exceptional person, Billy Mac. Seriously :)

Best Foot Forward ...
 

I'm an analytical chemist. I have to be. It puts food on my table.

I have many faults. I sometimes, no, often, screw up. But no one will ever accuse me of being lazy, or not trying my best.

The IAABO leadership has a whole year to publish one, single manual. How hard is that to successfully accomplish? What do they do when they're not attending conventions, drinking adult beverages, and playing golf?

Putting food on their tables? ;)

Aren't you over-reacting just a tetch, William? A disaster? Hell, I talked to 3 or 4 IAABO board interpreters and they talked to a few others. None of 'em had ever noticed the typo and no one was teaching the use of a different signal for a 5 second throw-in violation that the one that has been universally used by everyone, IAABO and non-IAABO, for umpty ump years. Great catch by you, but.....it just ain't that big a deal. And it sureasheck wasn't a big deal to any of the esteemed IAABO board interpreters either.

Chill. Santa is coming. :)

Time To Get Off The Soapbox ...
 

You're right. Certainly not a disaster.

But I wasn't just spouting off about the signal typo. I was spouting off about the whole switch from NFHS mechanics to IAABO mechanics. We were never told why. Never. What the heck was so bad about NFHS mechanics that we had to switch? There have been several other errors, or problems, or unannounced changes, since the switch. Some have involved out of bounds responsibilities in a half court set, and in transition. Another was an option on a front court endline throwin administration. In some cases options have been suggested, but it was never stated what mechanic the option was to. Just an option. No original mechanic.

Please note the title of my post #26. It's got a secret double meaning. Send me a self addressed, stamped envelope, and I'll send you a secret decoder ring. It's the same one the Mythbusters use.

On top of that, and this is more of a local problem than an "international" one, we have veteran officials who are still using NFHS mechanics.

Frosty Francis is rolling over in his grave.

How many differences are there, Billy?

The Tarzan Signal ...
 

Not sure, since we haven't used NFHS mechanics in a few years, and thus I don't have NFHS manuals. I'm really not that concerned with the differences, but rather, with the "herky jerky" evolution of the IAABO mechanics.

For example, I just discovered that tapping one's chest is the "official" IAABO signal that one has the coverage on the last shot. It's not on the "official" signal chart. It was never announced as a change. Yes, I know that some may have already used this as some type of "unofficial", or "when in Rome", type signal, but if IAABO wanted it to be "official" then why not put it on the chart, and announce it as a new mechanic, or a change?

http://www.youtube.com/v/rvZMXZ2s07Q&autoplay=1

Should be "fewer." Don't you have a proofreader?

Don't be hating yourself.

Designated Spot, Designated Spot, Designated Spot, Designated Spot ...
 

For many years, under both NFHS mechanics, and IAABO mechanics, here in our little corner of Connecticut we have been encouraged to verbalize, in addition to using hand signals, "designated spot", or "you can run the endline", to a throwin player on his backcourt endline, especially after a timeout. This may not have been in either manual, but we all thought that is was a good suggestion, and we all did it.

Last year an "official" IAABO mechanic change was to verbalize, "designated spot", on all designated spot throwins. "All" meaning throwins on endlines, sidelines, frontcourt, and backcourt. I asked my interpreter if IAABO actually meant all throwins, or just throwins on the backcourt endline. The answer he got back from IAABO was to use common sense and just do it on backcourt endline throwins, but that's not what the manual states. How hard could it have been for IAABO to print in the manual, "The official will signal, and verbalize, "designated spot", on all designated spot throwins on the endline, in the backcourt?

Good Catch ...
 

Touché.