2 for 2

[slow whistle]

Had my first post-season assignment as "R" the other night on the girls side. We are in the locker room, finish our pre-game with approx 20 mins to go on the locker room clock before the tip so we start to head to the floor to see what's up. The clock is running with both teams on the floor and the clock under 12 - still don't know if our clock was slow or they started early. By the time I get to the table, the visitor's roster is entered in the official book with starters marked, but home team is blank and their book is nowhere to be found. By the time we find it (girl who had it was wandering around), the clock is under 10 and no starters marked. So I start my post-season "R" career with a tech. I'm confident I handled correctly by rule, but ideally I would have been at the table sooner and we would have been fine - I know not my responsibility, but would anybody file this one under "game management" and let it go given the time situation?

Second night of regional I am U2, game is not close. Losing coach chirps a little early about wanting a hand check, but there is zero displacement and barely if any contact, and the first chance I get I tell him that. Late in the game I am T in front of his bench and his girl gets pushed going up the sideline and I have the foul. As I turn to report he lets out a loud laugh and says "so that is the displacement you were talking about?". My reply "yes coach that was displacment"..coach - "Well then that was a good call"...me - "thank you"...him - "that is supposed to be a point of emphasis but you didn't know that did you?"....me - whack.
Any thoughts/feedback? I wonder if i didn't instigate just a tiny bit with my reply of "thank you" when he was clearly being facetious? I think at that point he was just frustrated that his season was ending and was sort of asking for it - there was zero response whatsoever to the tech, not a word, never got off the bench...

[GoodwillRef]

This is the exact reason why hand checking is a point of emphasis every year...we fail to call it. Call one early set the tone...it is a POE!

[GoodwillRef]

This first game you had I am not starting with a techncial foul if we arrive late on the court because of game management...you yourself said if you were out earlier you would have had this corrected and everything would have been fine. This is where you have to be the "R" and take some responsibility.

[slow whistle]

Call what? Call a forearm barely if at all touching the hip of the dribbler who is not being impeded at all (the first time he chirped I was between him and his ball handler so he didn't even see the play - there was air between his player and the defender, he was clearly trying to set the tone as to how he wanted the game called)? Call contact where the defender gains and maintains LGP and the contact is being initiated by the dribbler? I can appreciate frustration when this is not being called and should be, but this was not one of those situations...trust me we called plenty of them during the course of the game...

[chartrusepengui]

I thought the OP sounded more like a "hot touch" than hand check so while a POE players are still allowed the "hot touch" as long as it is not prolonged, and displacement has not occurred. I'm not calling this a hand check the way it was described. "Barely if any contact" is not a hand check imo even with the POE. I don't think this is what the POE was referring to.

[tref]

Originally Posted by slow whistle

Had my first post-season assignment as "R" the other night on the girls side. We are in the locker room, finish our pre-game with approx 20 mins to go on the locker room clock before the tip so we start to head to the floor to see what's up. The clock is running with both teams on the floor and the clock under 12 - still don't know if our clock was slow or they started early. By the time I get to the table, the visitor's roster is entered in the official book with starters marked, but home team is blank and their book is nowhere to be found. By the time we find it (girl who had it was wandering around), the clock is under 10 and no starters marked. So I start my post-season "R" career with a tech. I'm confident I handled correctly by rule, but ideally I would have been at the table sooner and we would have been fine - I know not my responsibility, but would anybody file this one under "game management" and let it go given the time situation?

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

Originally Posted by slow whistle

Second night of regional I am U2, game is not close. Losing coach chirps a little early about wanting a hand check, but there is zero displacement and barely if any contact, and the first chance I get I tell him that. Late in the game I am T in front of his bench and his girl gets pushed going up the sideline and I have the foul. As I turn to report he lets out a loud laugh and says "so that is the displacement you were talking about?". My reply "yes coach that was displacment"..coach - "Well then that was a good call"...me - "thank you"...him - "that is supposed to be a point of emphasis but you didn't know that did you?"....me - whack.
Any thoughts/feedback?

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

Originally Posted by slow whistle

I wonder if i didn't instigate just a tiny bit with my reply of "thank you" when he was clearly being facetious? I think at that point he was just frustrated that his season was ending and was sort of asking for it - there was zero response whatsoever to the tech, not a word, never got off the bench

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.

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

This is the exact reason why hand checking is a point of emphasis every year...we fail to call it. Call one early set the tone...it is a POE!

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?

[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.

[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.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by GoodwillRef

This is the exact reason why hand checking is a point of emphasis every year...we fail to call it. Call one early set the tone...it is a POE!

Yeah, it's a POE which I'm sure Slow knows but it wasn't a foul.

Analogy


Coach: "there was contact"
Official: "Yes, but it wasn't illegal contact"

Same thing, and since you weren't there and slow had a pretty, pretty good view, I'm going with him. It's also against the law to go 36 in a 35 zone

[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.