What are "we" telling coaches?
 

In the past week of varsity games I have been told by 3 different coaches that they have never heard that the defender doesn't have to be "set" to take a charge. I know I am going to hear that I shouldn't believe what they are saying, but in all honesty, I believe them. They think the defender needs to be set to take a charge. I explain legal guarding position and all that, and they look like a deer in headlights.

What are other refs telling coaches? Why is this such a difficult concept to understand?

Are you saying that coaches are telling you this based on what officials are telling them?

I do not tell coaches anything but that they were in LGP or they were not in LGP. Even if they try to tell me that a player was set or not, I then ask them, "What does set have to do with LGP?" There is a different concept of understanding because coaches never pick up a rulebook and do what most that played and coach do, go by what they think the rule is rather than what is the actual rules wording. I have even heard TV commentators use the term LGP and not explain the rule correctly. Sorry, but coaches think a lot of things without us telling them anything.

Peace

I never use the word set when talking about charge/block, i only use LGP. And yes, they are telling me they are being told by other officials that players are set or not.

Then believe them. That is your choice. But I do not believe most of what comes out of their coach's mouths as I have asked them specifically and when you talk to the official there is a different story. Life is about choices man. ;)

Peace

Coaches lie, especially about what another officials supposedly told them.

+1

And that is why you should always get both sides, folks.

+1. As noted previously, this erroneous information has been passed on to a coaching staff I am familiar with. Along with all sorts of interesting "interpretations".

Real simple: "The defender got there" or "he didn't get there". You can add an "I don't believe he got there" or "I believe he got there" if that helps manage the reaction. Coaches get that, and there is no other place for them to go with that line except to T-Ville. It's the same as "I disagree." It ends all legitimate conversation as nicely as possible from our end.

Assuming That's It's Not An Airborne Shooter ...
 

Got where? I think that the phrase "got there" implies that the defender can't move. Keep in mind that once he gets "there", he's allowed to move in several directions: backward, diagonally backward and to the left, diagonally backward and to the right, left, and right. And we can add up to that list if you want to add a third dimension.

I've also had more than one coach look at me funny when I mention "LGP." That doesn't mean you should quit trying.

Keep fighting the good fight with the correct terminology. The more that do it, the more likely everyone will be on the same page.

what they've been told and what they've heard are often two separate things.

I don't question the questionable interpretations that get passed to coaches over the years. I do, however, question his statement that he's "never" heard about LGP.

I will go with that. But I also have heard OFFICIALS say they have never heard of it either!! Honestly, you should see some of the looks the Mrs gets when she asks "Why did you think she was not in LGP?" :D

This is at least somewhat true. I hear fellow officials talk about "over the back", "reaching", and "He wasn't set" all the time. I also see other officials move all the players behind the division line during technical FTs, among other things.

This is what I am talking about.

Those officials are just wondering what you're wife is talking about, since no coach knows what legal guarding position is.

Well played, well played. I can neither confirm nor deny where she got the idea to use that type of verbiage.:D

No, it means the defender beat the offensive player to the spot, cut him off, won the play, and earned the call.

Maybe to those of us who know the rule, but to those who don't, it means he isn't supposed to move. When an official who knows the rule says "over the back," he means push. When he says "reach," he generally means illegal use of the hands. When a coach who doesn't understand the rules hears those terms, he thinks something else entirely.

you forgot upwards. :)

I Don't Think Down Would Apply ???
 

Look again.

Eh, I'm OK with that phraseology myself. Maybe I'm getting soft.

Tv
 

Watching televised basketball is a great aid to help pick up what advantage/disadvantage looks like. However, there is a difference between watching the TV and listening to the commentators. Even the best commentators have very limited knowledge of the rules. And sometimes a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, especially when those with a little knowledge try to pass themselves off as experts. Don't get me wrong, I like watching games that Dick Vitale is working but he knows very little about basketball rules. Too may are listening to what he as to say as if it comes out of the rule books. Coaches need to realize that in a high school game the officials have undergone comprehensive rules studies and have likely been to several basketball camps to improve on their craft. Stop asking for the "over the back" and the "reach" calls as these are simply not fouls. Also realize that a foul requires contact however, not all contact is a foul.

Sorry, just had to vent.

Also, where did the notion come from that when shooting a technical foul all players (non shooting) need to be behind the division line?

Who knows? I had a game Saturday with 3 technicals and a flagrant and all the players dutifully went behind the division line. Who am I to stop them?

Right, why would you stop them? They're legal back there. ;)

I had a game where a technical foul was called (I think that my partner called it as he went opposite table and I administered the free throws) and he told all the players to go behind the mid court line. He was the R on the game, not that R or U1 matters at that point, but I wasn't going to stop him from having them go behind half court. Just wondering where that idea come from.

Unfortunately the bolded part is not true for the majority of high school officials, at least in this area, and in many others I suspect. You would be shocked at the number of rules that partners try to enforce or not enforce that are plain wrong.

So far this year I've been told that:

- Other nine players have to be behind the division line during technical foul FTs (Almost every official I know believes this to be true....even saw D1 officials enforce it this weekend).

- Only the players on the court can shoot technical foul FTs. Bench players are not eligible.

- That once the book has been checked at the 10-minute mark, it is final and scorekeeper error (Copying down the wrong number from a roster) doesn't exist and a technical must be given.

I'm sure I'll think of more.

Not only have I had partners put all the other players behind the division line, I heard a veteran partner tell a rookie official that the team whose bench is in the backcourt should not be allowed to talk to their coach near the sideline since the team with the frontcourt bench can't cross the division line to talk to their coach. :eek:

JW, do you remember what D1 game this was? That is unreal.....don't even know what to say.

Doing the scorebook for my sons' HS team the last two years, I can not even begin to count the number of times I have heard officials tell a coach "He wasn't set" when explaining why they called a block. I cringe every time I hear it.

Yes, I was at the game, but I don't want to say which game it was. It was actually during the FTs for an intentional foul. Most of the players went into the backcourt on their own, but a few stragglers were standing near the center circle in the frontcourt. The official that was table side walked toward them and gave them the "scoot back" motion with his arm and they all moved behind the division line.

+1.....