Team Control Mechanic Not Authorized in Ohio

[jhc2010]

This is from the Ohio High School Official Association. They do not allow their officials to use the punch for a team control foul and require officials to go against the NFHS mechanics manual and go behind the head when calling an illegal screen.

"Several questions have been raised concerning the proper signal for a “team control” foul. There has been no change from the previous years. In Ohio, we will continue to use signal #34 for both TEAM and PLAYER control fouls. We will NOT use signal #35 for TEAM control fouls. Again, there is no change from past years."

http://www.ohsaa.org/officials/Offic...TER%202011.pdf

They go on to say later in the Winter Bulletin they issued today:
"Please adhere to the mechanics as outlined in the NF Officials Manual. One of our major goals for the officiating program is consistency in mechanics throughout the state. There is no place for individual preferences and modifications of the mechanics either by association or conference.

What's up with this?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by jhc2010

They go on to say later in the Winter Bulletin they issued today:
"Please adhere to the mechanics as outlined in the NF Officials Manual. One of our major goals for the officiating program is consistency in mechanics throughout the state. There is no place for individual preferences and modifications of the mechanics either by association or conference.

What's up with this?

Sounds like somebody is exercising their individual preferences and modifications of the mechanics.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by jhc2010

This is from the Ohio High School Official Association. They do not allow their officials to use the punch for a team control foul and require officials to go against the NFHS mechanics manual and go behind the head when calling an illegal screen.

"Several questions have been raised concerning the proper signal for a “team control” foul. There has been no change from the previous years. In Ohio, we will continue to use signal #34 for both TEAM and PLAYER control fouls. We will NOT use signal #35 for TEAM control fouls. Again, there is no change from past years."

http://www.ohsaa.org/officials/Offic...TER%202011.pdf

They go on to say later in the Winter Bulletin they issued today:
"Please adhere to the mechanics as outlined in the NF Officials Manual. One of our major goals for the officiating program is consistency in mechanics throughout the state. There is no place for individual preferences and modifications of the mechanics either by association or conference.

What's up with this?

As a new-to-Ohio referee, it caught me by surprise. I don't remember it being covered by the online rules meeting I took and I've been using the team control signal all year.

It's strange to me also because in the soccer rules meeting they made a big deal about how OHSAA would be kicked out of the NFHS if they deviated at all from the Fed book but apparently it's important enough to risk for basketball.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by jhc2010

This is from the Ohio High School Official Association. They do not allow their officials to use the punch for a team control foul and require officials to go against the NFHS mechanics manual and go behind the head when calling an illegal screen.

"Several questions have been raised concerning the proper signal for a “team control” foul. There has been no change from the previous years. In Ohio, we will continue to use signal #34 for both TEAM and PLAYER control fouls. We will NOT use signal #35 for TEAM control fouls. Again, there is no change from past years."

http://www.ohsaa.org/officials/Offic...TER%202011.pdf

They go on to say later in the Winter Bulletin they issued today:
"Please adhere to the mechanics as outlined in the NF Officials Manual. One of our major goals for the officiating program is consistency in mechanics throughout the state. There is no place for individual preferences and modifications of the mechanics either by association or conference.

What's up with this?

Personally, I'd be OK with using the player control signal for a TC foul. The punch looks a lot like a point in the other direction, IMO. I use the proper signal but could make that switch quickly.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Sounds like somebody is exercising their individual preferences and modifications of the mechanics.

Either that or practicing to be IAABO members when they grow up.....

Bad Woddy! Bad, bad Woddy!

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Personally, I'd be OK with using the player control signal for a TC foul. The punch looks a lot like a point in the other direction, IMO. I use the proper signal but could make that switch quickly.

Ironically, I'd rather do away with the PC signal and just use the TC signal for both. The PC signal just feels really awkward.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Ironically, I'd rather do away with the PC signal and just use the TC signal for both. The PC signal just feels really awkward.

Agreed. I use the TC signal when giving my prelim for PC fouls. At the table, I use the PC signal but I was trained by a former CBA ref who always told us to "punch it" on PC fouls.

I know some people don't like that but the PC signal feels and looks really awkward, especially on a prelim. Nobody has said anything to me about using the mechanics I do on the prelim.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Agreed. I use the TC signal when giving my prelim for PC fouls. At the table, I use the PC signal but I was trained by a former CBA ref who always told us to "punch it" on PC fouls.

I know some people don't like that but the PC signal feels and looks really awkward, especially on a prelim. Nobody has said anything to me about using the mechanics I do on the prelim.

Well, in retrospect, I agree. I always punch it at the spot and give the PC signal at the table. And that's what I'm really advocating for both TC and PC fouls. At the table, the punch seems awkward to me -- at the spot the punch the other way is just perfect.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Ironically, I'd rather do away with the PC signal and just use the TC signal for both. The PC signal just feels really awkward.

I agree..especially on bang bang calls. A team control signal looks a lot stronger and sells a call a lot more, IMO than putting a hand behind the head. Plus it just looks silly. I'll still report it that way at the table though.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Well, in retrospect, I agree. I always punch it at the spot and give the PC signal at the table. And that's what I'm really advocating for both TC and PC fouls. At the table, the punch seems awkward to me -- at the spot the punch the other way is just perfect.

Gotcha.

To be honest, I have not really been using the punch mechanic at the table either. Instead I've been going with the block mechanic for illegal screens, which I should probably stop doing.

I agree the punch can seem a little awkward at the table. But I guess I should start practicing that too.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

Gotcha.

I agree the punch can seem a little awkward at the table. But I guess I should start practicing that too.

I've been doing the same. TC or PC signal as appropriate for pre-lim and then the actual foul signal (block, charge, etc) when reporting.

APG, the PC on a banger block/charge is what really seems to tie me. It seems a lot more natural to just go with the TC.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Sounds like somebody is exercising their individual preferences and modifications of the mechanics.

Aaaannnnd that is their right to do so.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Welpe

Ironically, I'd rather do away with the PC signal and just use the TC signal for both. The PC signal just feels really awkward.

On my bang-bang PC fouls, my prelim on the spot is to point the other direction (index finger). At the table I go with the PC mechanic.

On team control fouls I sometimes punch, sometimes point, on the spot. To the table I give either a punch or block mechanic. Just whatever feels natural at that moment.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Welpe

APG, the PC on a banger block/charge is what really seems to tie me. It seems a lot more natural to just go with the TC.

Exactly. To me, it's more natural and just a stronger signal. I kind of wish they'd just do away with the player control signal

[Camron Rust]

Additionally, a PC foul is essentially just a special version of at TC foul. If you apply the same extension for an airborne shooter to the TC foul, every PC foul would also be a TC foul. Just get rid of the PC foul since the only real difference is that it is specifically on the player with the ball but it has no additional consequence.