two man chop?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Here is why I think it is different. In three person the trail has a lot of coverage area on the same side of the Lead. You will be looking on the same side of the court and the ball will be passed to your side. In two person you are on the other side of the court and if you are watching the ball you will miss a lot in your area. The C can cover a lot of off-ball screening and movement. I guess you can do that, but if you miss a screen or something I would wonder why you were doing that. After all there is a reason that hardly anyone uses 2 Person at the varsity level. Not sure why tournaments are being so cheap to only use two. Glad that is not the case in the games I work in the same area and I would refuse but I digress.

Peace

You are writing this as if I am not doing anything other than mirroring a chop.

I guess I just don't understand why posters in this thread are being so dense. Let me summarize:

(1) My mirroring a chop in 2-person or 3-person *does not* take my attention off of anything else. I *am not* watching the ball. I AM NOT WATCHING THE BALL.

(2) I can either sense the touch on the court and chop or mirror a partner's chop without staring at that activity. I mean, I administer throw-ins all the time without staring directly at the basketball.

(3) I am going to get (or miss) that same illegal screen whether I'm mirroring a chop or not.

As far as not taking any 2-person games, I'll take any varsity game and work it however they want me to work it. If 2-person is good enough for those who are signing the checks and playing the game, it's good enough for me. We used to offer to bring a third and split 2 checks, but instead of convincing schools that it was worth it to pay for a third, I instead had ADs ask me if we would bring a third for free. Nope, sorry.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

We used to offer to bring a third and split 2 checks, but instead of convincing schools that it was worth it to pay for a third, I instead had ADs ask me if we would bring a third for free. Nope, sorry.

What's the difference in 3 splitting 2 checks and the third being free?

[Rich]

Originally Posted by just another ref

What's the difference in 3 splitting 2 checks and the third being free?

It's the same thing, just worded differently.

My point was that we offered to do it for a few years thinking that maybe it would encourage schools to figure out how to pay for 3 full-time. Instead, it just got schools to the point where they figured we'd bring 3-for-2 all the time. So (with a few exceptions) we've gone back to just bringing 2 officials to games.

10 years ago, football moved from 4 officials to 5 and no varsity game in the state now is played with 4 officials. We simply haven't been able to move basketball to 3 in the same manner. Personally, I think the state office could've been stronger in this regard (they still schedule 2-man for the first 2 rounds of the playoffs, for example), but they haven't been.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

(1) My mirroring a chop in 2-person or 3-person *does not* take my attention off of anything else. I *am not* watching the ball. I AM NOT WATCHING THE BALL.

Unfortunately, we can't say that about everyone. For that reason, the NCHSAA does not allow us to mirror the chop

10 years ago, football moved from 4 officials to 5 and no varsity game in the state now is played with 4 officials. We simply haven't been able to move basketball to 3 in the same manner. Personally, I think the state office could've been stronger in this regard (they still schedule 2-man for the first 2 rounds of the playoffs, for example), but they haven't been.

Agreed. The NCHSAA mandated three man for all varsity games in 1991. That's the only sure fire way to make all schools use three man.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Unfortunately, we can't say that about everyone. For that reason, the NCHSAA does not allow us to mirror the chop

I don't, either. It's not proper in WI, either. But the argument, I think, is specious. It's almost as bad as people that scream out "BALL WATCHER" whenever an officials so much as notices something outside his primary.

And I would be happy to take a small pay cut for varsity ball and split the difference with the schools. I would take $50 instead of $60 to work all 3-person provided the fees went back up within 3 years or so. It would cost a school $30 per game. Most schools have 22 home dates (11 boys and 11 girls), so it would cost $660 per season. Raise the admission by 50¢ a person and you'd easily cover that. Nobody's ever asked us about that, though.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

It's the same thing, just worded differently.

My point was that we offered to do it for a few years thinking that maybe it would encourage schools to figure out how to pay for 3 full-time. Instead, it just got schools to the point where they figured we'd bring 3-for-2 all the time. So (with a few exceptions) we've gone back to just bringing 2 officials to games.

10 years ago, football moved from 4 officials to 5 and no varsity game in the state now is played with 4 officials. We simply haven't been able to move basketball to 3 in the same manner. Personally, I think the state office could've been stronger in this regard (they still schedule 2-man for the first 2 rounds of the playoffs, for example), but they haven't been.

Too bad the state doesn't mandate the schools do x number of 3 person games.since the tournament uses them. It is not the same game from the officials standpoint and to expect them to all of a sudden adapt without practice, i.e. a certain number of 3 person games during the regular season, is a bit short sighted.

VT went that route, and the size of the school dictates the number of games they must have with 3. Officials must also have 10 3 person games during the season to qualify to do playoff games. FL has that as well, though I haven't figured out the requisite number of 3 person games each school must have.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

Too bad the state doesn't mandate the schools do x number of 3 person games.since the tournament uses them. It is not the same game from the officials standpoint and to expect them to all of a sudden adapt without practice, i.e. a certain number of 3 person games during the regular season, is a bit short sighted.

VT went that route, and the size of the school dictates the number of games they must have with 3. Officials must also have 10 3 person games during the season to qualify to do playoff games. FL has that as well, though I haven't figured out the requisite number of 3 person games each school must have.

It's a process that has had enormous growing pains for just that reason. Coaches and assignors complain because it seems each crew (that isn't a regular crew) has one "weak" official, so why don't we just work 2-man? And I've never seen a single subvarsity game played with 3 officials here, either.

So, it's trial and learning by fire. People working games that count 3-person when they simply don't have the experience to handle those games properly. And then everyone, including those officials, wish out loud that we'd just work 2-man and be done with it.

If the state would mandate 3 and suggest a pay cut for 3 years from $60 to $50 it would take 3-4 years for everyone to be proficient (and some officials may never catch on, but those guys weren't working a good 2-man game, either) and coaches and sportswriters would have to hold their tongues and let the process happen. But the state office hasn't shown a willingness to advocate three person strongly enough. It's frustrating.

In the meantime, all of the good officials' education being taught now in clinics and camps is 3-person. There are no good intermediate-to-advanced camps being taught 3-person, so officials are pretty much on their own in developing skills on the 2-person side. That shouldn't be developed anymore anyway, but I digress.....

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

It's a process that has had enormous growing pains for just that reason. Coaches and assignors complain because it seems each crew (that isn't a regular crew) has one "weak" official, so why don't we just work 2-man? And I've never seen a single subvarsity game played with 3 officials here, either.

So, it's trial and learning by fire. People working games that count 3-person when they simply don't have the experience to handle those games properly. And then everyone, including those officials, wish out loud that we'd just work 2-man and be done with it.

If the state would mandate 3 and suggest a pay cut for 3 years from $60 to $50 it would take 3-4 years for everyone to be proficient (and some officials may never catch on, but those guys weren't working a good 2-man game, either) and coaches and sportswriters would have to hold their tongues and let the process happen. But the state office hasn't shown a willingness to advocate three person strongly enough. It's frustrating.

In the meantime, all of the good officials' education being taught now in clinics and camps is 3-person. There are no good intermediate-to-advanced camps being taught 3-person, so officials are pretty much on their own in developing skills on the 2-person side. That shouldn't be developed anymore anyway, but I digress.....

That is too bad. Of course, some are weak officials, and some are learning officials. But as you said, the weak ones are weak in 2 person crews anyway.
One of the ways to develop a 3 crew official is to use Frosh DHs as a training ground IMO. A veteran can partner with two learning officials and split the fees 3 ways. That would also bring better officiating to frosh games from time to time and doing a double with 3 would not be as taxing as a double with two, of course. So, perhaps the smaller game fee would be the price of training and developing. All this is moot, though, if your state doesn't think it is important.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

That is too bad. Of course, some are weak officials, and some are learning officials. But as you said, the weak ones are weak in 2 person crews anyway.
One of the ways to develop a 3 crew official is to use Frosh DHs as a training ground IMO. A veteran can partner with two learning officials and split the fees 3 ways. That would also bring better officiating to frosh games from time to time and doing a double with 3 would not be as taxing as a double with two, of course. So, perhaps the smaller game fee would be the price of training and developing. All this is moot, though, if your state doesn't think it is important.

What's worse is that the officials don't want to split the $160 (a FR DH pays $80 per official here) and many vets wouldn't want to take a night off a varsity game to work a FR DH (quite frankly, I don't, unless it's some kind of organized program).

Matter of fact, some officials prefer working the FR DH because it pays $20 more than working one varsity game. Those are the people you don't really want to see in the varsity games anyway.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

VT went that route, and the size of the school dictates the number of games they must have with 3. Officials must also have 10 3 person games during the season to qualify to do playoff games. FL has that as well, though I haven't figured out the requisite number of 3 person games each school must have.

That's very odd to me. What does the school size have to do with whether you mandate 3 man or 2 man?

Surely it's not based on the gate. I routinely work 1A and 2A schools that have a larger attendance than the bigger 4A schools. Many small communities provde better support for their teams.

With the exception of one conference, all of our JV games use 3 man. That's been the case for alonst 10 years.

The conference where we work 2 man plays JVG, JVB, VG, and VB all at the same site beginning at 4pm. The JV games have a running clock, except for the last two mintues of each half. That was the compromise we negotiated to go to 2 man; shorter games and a shorter night for everyone.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Many small communities proved better support for their teams.

Same here in my little corner of Connecticut. We have one conference of very small schools that always have big crowds on a Friday nights. Of course there's absolutely nothing else to do in these very small towns on a Friday night. It's either watch a high school basketball game, or mosey on downtown and watch the one traffic light change colors.

Some of our guys don't like doing these games, a lot of below the rim stuff, but I love them. I'm a big believer that games like these are the most important games being played that night for these kids, fans, and coaches, and I make sure that I officiate the game keeping that in mind, through my effort, and my attitude.

[Terrapins Fan]

Billy, I doubt that your schools are smaller than ours. Most of our high schools have less than 700 kids total 9-12. Many we referee for about about 200- 300 kids. We have 11 high schools and 13 middle schools.

All the high school games are 3 person.

Everything else is 2 person.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

That's very odd to me. What does the school size have to do with whether you mandate 3 man or 2 man?

Surely it's not based on the gate. I routinely work 1A and 2A schools that have a larger attendance than the bigger 4A schools. Many small communities provde better support for their teams.

With the exception of one conference, all of our JV games use 3 man. That's been the case for alonst 10 years.

The conference where we work 2 man plays JVG, JVB, VG, and VB all at the same site beginning at 4pm. The JV games have a running clock, except for the last two mintues of each half. That was the compromise we negotiated to go to 2 man; shorter games and a shorter night for everyone.

Let me expand: Largest schools [with biggest gates] are expected to have 3 crews for 4 GV & 4 BV home games. Next biggest, 3 of each, and so forth. Largest schools also have larger budgets AND there are not many private schools in VT, which here in FL seem to be in the lowest 3 of 6 classifications. [I presume that there may be more private schools in NC that populate some of the smaller classifications, hence some larger gates.]

Also, in VT, coach buses are used by many larger schools and the large schools tend to not have to travel as far for many of their games.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

That's very odd to me. What does the school size have to do with whether you mandate 3 man or 2 man?

I could make an argument that bigger schools likely have better athletes and their games likely need 3 officials more than smaller schools. Sure, there are exceptions that prove the rule.

But from a money standpoint, it makes little sense, I agree.

From a completely non-PC standpoint, I'd be thrilled to go 3-person for all boys games and none of the girls games.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

[I presume that there may be more private schools in NC that populate some of the smaller classifications, hence some larger gates.]

Nope. There are only 2 private schools among the almost 400 schools that comprise the NCHSAA.

Athletic budgets are based solely on individual school district funding. Size really doesn't have much to do with it.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Same here in my little corner of Connecticut. We have one conference of very small schools that always have big crowds on a Friday nights. Of course there's absolutely nothing else to do in these very small towns on a Friday night. It's either watch a high school basketball game, or mosey on downtown and watch the one traffic light change colors.

Some of our guys don't like doing these games, a lot of below the rim stuff, but I love them. I'm a big believer that games like these are the most important games being played that night for these kids, fans, and coaches, and I make sure that I officiate the game keeping that in mind, through my effort, and my attitude.

Keep me in town on Tuesdays, in town being where the 4A schools are, and send me out of town where the gyms are packed on Friday night.

Originally Posted by RichMSN

From a completely non-PC standpoint, I'd be thrilled to go 3-person for all boys games and none of the girls games.

I don't have any desire to do any 2 man games. No thank you.