2 for 2

[slow whistle]

Originally Posted by tref

Were they playing at a neutral site? Usually the home teams book is the "official book."



Sounds like alot of running dialog... do you go opposite table following a foul?



He was absolutely frustrated. Season is over!! Perhaps leaving out the "thank you" & letting him get his smart remark off, could've saved you from assessing 2 Ts in 2 post-season games.




Hand checking is a foul when it affects freedom of movement or RSBQ. Because "mere contact does not constitute a foul" right?

Nothing like a kid playing through the touch to score a layup, then we put a whistle on it & say try again. Who are we REALLY penalizing on these plays?

This was neutral site - home team was just the team wearing white. My question is more to responsibility and GWR raises the point - at what point do we as officials vs. the coaches/teams bear the brunt of the responsibility for getting the books done correctly? There is nothing requiring me to go over and check the book before the 10 minute mark, but most officials I know do it to avoid this situation...

We stay table side after reporting foul, so I wound up almost in front of his bench for the 1-1 attempts - could've forced a switch and in hindsight probably should have. I suppose I could have ignored the "question" as loaded as it was, but it was a question so I replied to it as concisely as I could.

[referee99]

.... love the second!

[Indianaref]

I forget who said it in another thread, RSBQ maybe helps you to understand it better but it is just camp speak for advantage/disadvantage. Hand checking is one of those things that I know it when I see it and I will call it.

[dsqrddgd909]

2010-2011 POE

Can someone explain to this 2nd year official, how to interpret #3? I understand all contact is not a foul.

3. PERIMETER PLAY. Two illegal actions are taking place on the perimeter of the court that are particularly problematic. First, defensive players are illegally using their hands to “check” the ball handler/dribbler. Secondly, offensive players are palming the ball to elude the defender. Both of these illegal tactics are going uncalled, which in turn, promotes further illegal actions (see Point of Emphasis #1).

A. Hand checking.

1) Hand checking is any tactic using the hands or arms that allows a player, on offense or defense, to control (hold, impede, push, divert, slow or prevent) the movement of an opposing player.
2) Hand checking is a foul and is not incidental contact.
3) Defensive players shall not have hand(s) on the offensive player. When a player has a hand on, two hands on or jabs a hand or forearm on an opponent, it is a foul.
4) When a player contacts an opponent with his or her hands as an aid in starting, stopping, driving around, defending a screen, controlling or anticipating the opponent’s next move, it is a foul. Players may not place their hands on an opponent with or without the ball.
5) Much of the roughness in the interscholastic game today is a direct result of not assessing the proper penalty when illegal contact with the hand(s) occurs.

[bob jenkins]

NCAAW has made it clear that "handchecking" does NOT require RSBQ / Displacement / Ad-disad to be a foul. A hand remaining on, two hands, continuous hands, an extended arm-bar is a foul. A single "hot stove" touch is allowed, as long as it does not displace / impede / reroute.

Given who is in charge, I wouldn't be surprised to see that philosophy trickle down.

[tref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

NCAAW has made it clear that "handchecking" does NOT require RSBQ / Displacement / Ad-disad to be a foul. A hand remaining on, two hands, continuous hands, an extended arm-bar is a foul. A single "hot stove" touch is allowed, as long as it does not displace / impede / reroute.

Given who is in charge, I wouldn't be surprised to see that philosophy trickle down.

Well they need to eliminate "mere contact does not constitute a foul" then.
I thought we refereed the result of contact
But I'm versatile, I can adjust depending upon what a particular boss wants from night to night.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

NCAAW has made it clear that "handchecking" does NOT require RSBQ / Displacement / Ad-disad to be a foul. A hand remaining on, two hands, continuous hands, an extended arm-bar is a foul. A single "hot stove" touch is allowed, as long as it does not displace / impede / reroute.

Given who is in charge, I wouldn't be surprised to see that philosophy trickle down.

Know what? That's exactly how we teach that the play should be called. And afaik, it also fits in perfectly with what the FED is trying to accomplish through their almost yearly POE's on hand checking.

Well said.

[chartrusepengui]

+1

[CoachP]

Rsbq????

[dsqrddgd909]

Rhythm,speed balance, quickness.

[tref]

Rhythym, Speed, Balance & Quickness... you know, freedom of movement.

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

This was neutral site - home team was just the team wearing white. My question is more to responsibility and GWR raises the point - at what point do we as officials vs. the coaches/teams bear the brunt of the responsibility for getting the books done correctly? There is nothing requiring me to go over and check the book before the 10 minute mark, but most officials I know do it to avoid this situation...

We stay table side after reporting foul, so I wound up almost in front of his bench for the 1-1 attempts - could've forced a switch and in hindsight probably should have. I suppose I could have ignored the "question" as loaded as it was, but it was a question so I replied to it as concisely as I could.

If you can avoid it, that's great. If you can't, you can't. Ultimately it's not our job to get the names in the book.

I think you need to either ignore the comment or issue the T there (with the first the better option imo). You gave him enough rope for him to hang himself with. Ultimately his fault, but we should avoid handing out the rope if we can.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

If you can avoid it, that's great. If you can't, you can't. Ultimately it's not our job to get the names in the book.

+1

Game management doesn't include looking for a reason not to call these "book" fouls. The rules have been in place for umpty-ump years. There's no reason for teams not to know what their pre-game responsibilities are.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

+1

Game management doesn't include looking for a reason not to call these "book" fouls. The rules have been in place for umpty-ump years. There's no reason for teams not to know what their pre-game responsibilities are.

One possible reason is a bunch of officials who bent over backwards to accomodate the coach and not call the T.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

One possible reason is a bunch of officials who bent over backwards to accomodate the coach and not call the T.

Snaqs, after reading some of the posts this morning, all I'm wondering is whatever happened to "forget about worrying what the coaches and fans think or want and just call the damn game the way the rulesmakers want us to"? It ain't rocket surgery.