I attended a game over the weekend in another part of my state to observe the officiating in hopes of sharpening my skills. I am an older than average (39) second year official but have been around the game as a player and coach most of my life. Although I am sure my grasp of the rules is not nearly as great as some officials on this board, I consider myself fairly well versed in the rules.
Here are some things I observed.

-Constant hand checking of the guards on the perimeter. Rarely called.

-Throw-in in the front court fumbled by A1 into the backcourt. A1 recovers and backcourt violation was called. Heard the official tell the coach "ball was touched in the frontcourt and then went into backcourt"

-Ball in control of dribbler near three point line in the frontcourt. Defense knocks ball away. Dribbler attempts to recover. Touches ball in front court and finally recovers in the back court. Official waves off backcourt violation.

-D1 prospect plays first five minutes of the game with jersey hanging out of trunks so low it was embarassing. Officials say nothing.

-Point guard dribbling ball closely guarded in the front court. Official counting is between 3rd and 4th count. Player picks up the dribble. Official counts 4 and 5 then whistles a five second violation.

-Throw-in to start the second half. 8 seconds later the table blows the horn and states the arrow was pointed the wrong way. Official resets the clock and starts the half over.

-A1 takes an 18 ft. set shot. Ball is nearly in the goal when B1 boxes A1 hard. A1 goes down. Ball goes in. Official states they are shooting 1.

-So much rough play in the post I thought I was at a D1 college game.

Although we do have local associations in my state, high school officials are hired by each school independent of local associations. It is my feeling that this process has the potential to keep good officials from doing some games at the expense of the "good ole boys" network. I was just wondering how many other states operate in this fashion.

Maybe the ref had such good presence that rule knowledge isn't necessary or maybe the game was in Illinois where the rules of the game depend on who the assignor is (oh, I couldn't resist). :-)

Yes, I can see where there could be a breeding ground for a "good ol' boys" network with the system you describe. I've always thought that giving coaches or A.D.'s <b> any </b> input to the officials who get their games is a huge conflict of interest. In our area, we have a combination of peer (fellow officials) ratings and independent observer ratings that determine where an official is rated. That determines the level of games they are qualified for. Then we have an assignor (NOT an active official) who schedules the officials for the games. I suppose you could have a "good ol' boys" network if the assignor was "taking care of his friends," but we also have a board of directors who oversees the assignor as well as "guidelines" for how the assigning is done based on the official's rating.

Z

Maybe the are State Tournament Officials?
 

Better yet, maybe he past your beloved test and does not have to prove anything on the court. Ya know, maybe they already know that they are doing the championship game, them might not care what happens during this game. ;)

Just because someone is given a game, does not mean that they know what they are doing, especially at the HS level. Some of the worst things I have seen are from HS level only officials. Not everyone is trained nor understands the game very well. Actually, I have found very few officials that even played the game on some level.

Some of your complaints Jake80 is judgement. I cannot tell on a computer screen what handchecking is. You were there and unless there was displacement, there is no handchecking by rule. Even what you call rough play, judgement comes into play there again. The other situations are just out there. Cannot give any reasonable answer but that the were assigned the games. It just works out that way sometimes.

Peace

Jake80

I am a "late bloomer" as well (4th season, 40 yrs old), I am curious about other aspects that you noticed in the game....
How was the "game flow"? Did they do a pre-game conference with that Captians, coaches, table....
When I have the luxury of staying for the varsity game (after officiating a JV game), I am like a sponge observing all the nuances... such as, but not limited to, Eye contact, partner (table & scorer) support, "seemless transitions", etc...

ZEBRAMAN

You would have a "hairy" if you were in our area, non-conference games are hired by the Home AD :p AND the coaches are the ones who rate the officials. They send card to the state association. Sadly, it is easy to identify the cards that come from the losing team.

Some of your complaints Jake80 is judgement. I cannot tell on a computer screen what handchecking is. You were there and unless there was displacement, there is no handchecking by rule.[/B][/QUOTE]New officials,please ignore the above statement.It is wrong.More experienced officials should already know that.Instead,take a look at p.68 of the rule book for this year's POE's.It details how the FED wants it called. Note the section "Rough Play'-4A(Hands Off)-and the statement "the measuring up of an opponent(tagging) IS hand checking,is not permitted,and is a FOUL". Displacement of a player is not germane or applicable in this particular instance.You might want to check with your local rules interpreter as to how strictly he may want it called,but it IS handchecking by rule,displacement IS not involved,and the NFHS rules committee IS recommending that it be called.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 2nd, 2003 at 04:37 PM]

Keep after it
 

You have the right idea Jake. Go see some games. See different officials. There are some good ones out there also. Find some you want to emmulate and watch their games.

Sounds like in this case... at least your rules knowledge... was above those doing the game.

There is something to learn from EVERYONE.... however you must decide to learn it and included in that decision is your selection of appropriate things to learn and those to avoid.

Perhaps you learned some things of value from this game... they were likely there to be had.

In my early days I watched a lot of games. I still watch whenever I can't call or have to work. Most nights I learned a lot about how to call a game from watching the officials. Others, I learned how not to call the game. Those nights I learned that there really is a need for me to stick around because I would do a better job then those guys that night. I left one gym in such disgust, that I thought I was God's gift to the area. From what you observed, take it down use it to grow from. Just remember though, that until you step on that floor and call the game, you really don't know what you would do in a similar situation.

This is not 1950.
 

New officials,please ignore the above statement.It is wrong.More experienced officials should already know that.Instead,take a look at p.68 of the rule book for this year's POE's.It details how the FED wants it called. Note the section "Rough Play'-4A(Hands Off)-and the statement "the measuring up of an opponent(tagging) IS hand checking,is not permitted,and is a FOUL". Displacement of a player is not germane or applicable in this particular instance.You might want to check with your local rules interpreter as to how strictly he may want it called,but it IS handchecking by rule,displacement IS not involved,and the NFHS rules committee IS recommending that it be called.

[/B][/QUOTE]

On page 68 of the NF Rulebook the NF makes it clear that Rule 4-27 applies to contact. Yes, they do not want hands on the dribblier, but any official worth his salt is not calling just a touch on a dribbler. That is where <b>judgement</b> comes in. If you are calling a touch and you have no displacement or no affect on a play, you might be watching more games than you are officiating. Maybe in your area that is permitted, but even in Women's College which has the most strict rule on handchecking, does not just say touching is handchecking. This is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read from you. There has to be some displacement or you will be calling handchecking all night. If a defender is getting beat and they touch them, I am not taking away a layup because they touched them. I am not taking away a open pass because the defender touched them. Handchecking has never been just a touch. You still have to use some kind of advantage disadvantage, the rule always backs that up. Rule 4-27 refers to all contact, not just all contact and then handchecking is the expection.

Peace

This is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read from you. [/B][/QUOTE]I hate to break this to you,Rut,but I didn't say that you could have handchecking without displacement. The NFHS rule book said that,and I just quoted the rule book "word for word".The RULEBOOK disagrees with your above statement regarding hand-checking.It says that you CAN have hand-checking without displacement.If you want to argue that,may I suggest that you contact the people who wrote that POE.Get in touch with the NFHS rulesmakers and tell THEM that their wording in the POE on p.68 is wrong-specifically "The measuring up of an opponent(tagging)is hand-checking,is not permitted,and is a FOUL".

You are arguing with the wrong person,and the "wrong person" is not gonna argue this any further with you. That would be pointless.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 2nd, 2003 at 06:39 PM]

I am not arguing, just making a point.
 

I hate to break this to you,Rut,but I didn't say that you could have handchecking without displacement. The NFHS rule book said that,and I just quoted the rule book "word for word".The RULEBOOK disagrees with your above statement.If you want to argue that,may I suggest that you contact the people who wrote that POE.Get in touch with the NFHS rulesmakers and tell THEM that their wording in the POE on p.68 is wrong-specifically "The measuring up of an opponent(tagging)is hand-checking,is not permitted,and is a FOUL".

You are arguing with the wrong person,and the "wrong person" is not gonna argue this any further with you. That would be pointless. [/B][/QUOTE]

The NF does not have a definition of what handchecking is, they just say that your cannot do it. I have never gotten the impression and never been told by the people that we have in our state that actually sit on the NF Basketball Committee Board or the NF Rulebook Editor, that comes directly from our state ever characterize handchecking as touching. And if you claim the NF wants us to call it that way, I have yet to meet and experienced official that calls it that way. Even in the NF Rulebook, the refer to an exsisting rule 4-27. All foul calls are judgement related. All violations are judgement related. You might not realize that a foul or a violation has taken place if you do not have the judgement to realize that it took place according to the rules. And anyone sitting in the stands and any self-respecting official should realize that what you see in the stands is not always what actually happen on the court. Really, that is the only point that I was making. Jake80 might have clearly thought that handchecking was taking place, but because he was not on the floor, he or anyone might not have got the same look.

You are right JR, this is silly. But just because you do not agree with it or it does not stand in your parts does not mean that it is wrong. I guarantee that if any official calls handchecking without considering some kind of displacement, they might be watching much more than they are officiating. Or better yet, they will not be officiating varsity or higher level games. The NF is not Women's Basketball and that is why many individuals are not doing them.

Peace

[Edited by JRutledge on Jan 2nd, 2003 at 06:54 PM]

Jake80,
You may have run into a game where the new guys actually got a chance to work their first varsity game.
mick

The Rough Play (repeated from 2001-02 - and when they repeat it, I'd say that some of us JUST AREN'T GETTING IT) also says, "defenders are not permitted to have hands on the dribbler!" (notice exclamation point).

It then goes on to say, "hand checking is <b> not </b> incidental contact; it gives a tremendous advantage to the person illegally using their hands." You'd have to be pretty hard-headed to think that displacement is required here. If the defense controls the offensive player <b> at all </b> you have a foul.

Rut, you cite Rule 4-27. Note that article 3 of 4-27 says, "contact which does <b> not </b> hinder the opponent from participating in normal defensive or offensive movements should be considered incidental." I can think of a lot of handchecking that hinders offensive movement without displacement. But then again, I'm just quoting from the rulebook which and obviously the NFHS rules committee knows far less about how the games should be called than your assignors.

Z

Nope, it's 2003 and the POE is current
 

Wrong again. Call it a couple of times each way in the first quarter and you've cleaned it up for the rest of the game.

2002-2003 NFHS Points of Emphasis
4. ROUGH PLAY
A. Hands off
• Defenders are not permitted to have hands on the dribbler!
• The measuring up of an opponent (tagging) is hand-checking, is not permitted, and is a FOUL.
• Use of a forearm, regardless of the duration of the contact is a FOUL.
• Hand checking is not incidental contact; it gives a tremendous advantage to the person illegally using their hands.

Funny how I don't see the word "displacement" mentioned. :p

Go ahead, call a touch on a stronger dribbler.
 

Again, if you call a touch in my area (remember our clinicians are not teaching the NF "hands off") then you will be officiating Junior High games. Because if you do not allow a player like Dee Brown on that went to Proviso East High School in Maywood, Illinois and is currently playing for Illinois in the Big Ten a touch when he drove to the basket when he was in HS, you would not be officiting much longer. And around here, to do Class AA ball (Big Schools) you better not be calling the first touch on a strong dribbler. You better consider some displacement whether you like it or not. The NF is not the standard for all things officiating. If it was, then the IHSA would not adopt many of their own mechanics and rules that the NF does not have in that little book. I am sure other states are the same.

Man, I bet your games take all day and your are in the 2 shot bonus in the first quarter. Coaches got to love you. ;)

Peace

Re: Go ahead, call a touch on a stronger dribbler.
 

A bet you would lose. Coaches in my area scout officiating crews, just like they scout opponents. They're familiar with what each crew will allow and what they won't let go. They know that our crew will clean up post play, hand checking, and illegal screens early.

And yes, they do love me! :p

The NF does not have a definition of what handchecking is, they just say that your cannot do it.

But just because you do not agree with it or it does not stand in your parts does not mean that it is wrong. [/B][/QUOTE]
Just a coupla comments on the above statements,Rut:
1)The NF sure does define exactly what you can do with your hands. The actual wording from R10-6-1 is "He/she shall not contact an opponent with his/her hand unless such contact is only with the opponent's hand while it is on the ball and is incidental to an attempt to play the ball.The use of hands on an opponent in any way that inhibits the freedom of movement of the opponent or acts as an aid to a player in starting or stopping is not legal." The POE 4A on p.68-labelled "Hands Off" further defines hand-checking.

2)Why are saying that I don't agree with it,or that anything that stands in my parts is right or wrong? If you re-read what I've written,you will see that I haven't offered any opinion at all on that particular rule,or stated how we call it in my area either.All I stated was that your initial statement about displacement having to be a part of a hand-checking foul is wrong--and I offered as proof the specific statement in the rulebook POE that I quoted.I still stand by that statement.It is a rule,but I never told you how to call the rule.I then said that you should check with your local interpreter as to how he/she wants you to call it.I personally don't have any problem with the way it may happen to be called in Illinois,as long as the guys there try to be consistent in the way they do call it.

Again JR, you are dealing in semantics. Just because they did not say in the same breath displacement, does not mean that is not the way it should be called. Considering that they use Rule 4-27 was also used, displacement has to take place in order to call a foul or to determine that you actually have a handcheck. Because in Illinois and in the bigger conferences, you better have a slow whistle and better call some kind of displacement, directing or stopping in order to call a handcheck. If none of these things are present, you better pass. It has even been interpreted that if a player is going north and south and a defender keeps that player from going north and south, then you have a foul. If a player is not making an attempt to the basket or going east or west on their own, then you pass or make sure that the defenders actions do not affect their movement. Now that is a philosophy, do not get all upset because it is not the NF that says this.

Remember, you might want to tell younger officials to start calling "moving screens" too, this has been in the POE last year and this year. Now if I or anyone else were to suggest that we call a moving screen, you might try to suggest that I was crazy or did not understand the rule. But this language is actually in the rulebook this year and I would never advocate calling a screen and saying "moving screen." Screens can be moving and be entirely legal, but if you look at the POE and never look at the rules that deal with contact or screening principles, you would think that it is illegal to move during a screen.

As far as I am concerned and looking at everything that is said in "hands off," you have to have some kind of displacement in order to call handchecking. Now maybe that is not the exact wording of the NF, but I would never use "moving screen" ever either. After saying all of that, it still comes down to the judgement of the official to determine whether you have handchecking at all. And you also might have two official call it differently. No differnet than post play or any other phase of the game. The rules are guides, but the official has to apply their own judgement to what they feel the rules mean or what actually took place.

Peace

I've got y'all beat in the old/new department. I didn't ref my first game until I was 43 and 1/2. I've succeeded by applying that old adage, "Old age and treachery will beat youth and enthusiasm every time!" Just kidding about the treachery...

This reminds me of a signature line someone used here for a while, although I haven't seen it lately: If you can't be a good example, you'll just have to be a horrible warning!

Nope,I'm dealing with the RULES! The exact same rules that I quoted verbatim to you.Those plainly written rules that I quoted verbatim to you!You can't make them disappear from the rule book,Rut.

Semantics is trying to shape those plainly written rules to try and disguise the fact that your statement,that I also quoted, was wrong.It was wrong,by RULE!

If you want to continue arguing,feel free to do so.It's not going to change the words in the rulebook in any way.

I know this won't be popular, but I'm leaning towards Rut's opinion on this issue. If we call a handcheck every time the defender touches the dribbler, we are creating a horrible flow and being a little too exacting with this rule. Does the contact impede the dribbler's movement? Is there an advantage created based on the contact?

I know this is the rule and it is a POE, but aren't there some rules we tend to bend for the sake of the game? 3 seconds comes to mind. So does 10 seconds on a FT attempt. To take this handcheck rule to the letter is not the best way to manage the game. Use some judgment and if the kid creates an advantage based on contact, call it.

I guarantee everyone that rebutted Rut will go out and let a little contact go. We all do it. I think you guys that don't like Rut are using the book to back up your argument and you are losing focus on the issue at hand.

I think that you need to go back and re-read all the posts,BigDave.You are mis-interpreting what is being said,and what the issue at hand in this thread has been to date.The only rebutting that anyone has done so far is to point out that there IS language in the rule book that says that you CAN have "hand-checking" WITHOUT having to displace someone,contrary to what Rut posted.I don't think anyone,including myself,has said that you HAVE to call it as strictly as the rule book tells you to.

Liking someone or not liking someone has got absolutely nothing to do with what I've been posting.I've been quoting the rule book only to date,and have not offered any personal opinion or comment on the particular rules language-other than to say that you should follow your local interpreter's direction as to how to call this rule.

I hope that straightens up where I stand on this,and clears up for you what the issue really has been.

PS-I pretty much agree with your first two paragraphs on how TO call the rule,but that was never the issue.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 3rd, 2003 at 03:17 AM]

What is handchecking?
 

If displacement is not apart of the rules, what is it then? What does the rules consider handchecking? Touching? About to touch the dribbler? Because with your rational, I am more confused what you think the NF feels that handchecking is? Just explain to me if displacement cannot be apart of this rule, then when do we have it according to the NF?

Peace

Re: What is handchecking?
 

No one has EVER stated that displacement is NOT a part of the rules.It most definitely is a PART of the rules(emphasis on "part").The statement that I am making is that hand-checking can ALSO be called without displacement being part of it. "Tagging" a player without displacing that player is a foul,according to the strictest interpretation of the NFHS rules. The particular rules that I quoted back that statement up.I am NOT saying that it SHOULD be called. I am saying that it CAN be called.

I hope that is cleared up now for you.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jan 3rd, 2003 at 03:34 AM]

You can sit here and debate about when to call handchecking all you want. The NFHS wants it cleaned up. IMO to get this cleaned up we need to call it early. Notice I didn't say call it often or don't use judgement. Judgement still comes into play on this one too.

If I have the point guard making a drive toward the basket and the defender has his hand or hands on him, two minutes into the game, I will probably have a whistle which lets everyone know that it is hands off tonight. One whistle, one foul, and most likely a clean game (at least up top) :D.

Re: Go ahead, call a touch on a stronger dribbler.
 

Rut,

Actually, Bktballref's crew probably calls a couple handchecks in the first quarter and never sees them again, leading to a well played game that both coaches appreciate. From your posts, it sounds as if handchecking will continue to be a POE for years to come (they continue until officials catch on).

Z

I agree you call it early............
 

but you do not just make it up. They have to make some kind effort to put their hand on them, but I still am not calling something until they do that. And just because you call it early, does not mean it will not happen late. I still am going to consider the actions and the abilities of the dribbler and defender. I really do not care what the NF wants, the folks in my part do not want calls for handchecking when you have better dribblers beating weak defenders to the hole or making easy passes that get lay-ups or dunks. I have had the privilege of officiating some very talented kids over the years, and those kids are quick and will blow by you no matter what the defender does. I am not calling a handcheck out front just because that defender touched them. That is really what we call around here a Class A call (small schools). If you want to do the big conferences or move up to the college level, you better not be too quick to call something and the play was not affected. I am from Big Ten country, these players and teams do not play ACC ball, where any touch is a foul. Just the way it is. And I do not buy that the NF just wants us to call touching as fouls. If that was the case they would never refer to 4-27 and make sure that we keep this in mind.

Peace

Rut,

Now you're starting to make some sense. One of your first posts stated (and I'm quoting from what YOU wrote),<i> "You were there and unless there was displacement, there is no handchecking by rule."</i> That doesn't wash with the rule book nor with reality.

Somewhere between a "touch foul" and "displacement" is a handcheck foul and I know it when I see it because it affects the dribble. This is where it's key to "hold your whistle" so that you don't penalize a strong player.

Z

Rut, The NF wants to clean up the handchecking. What you are calling is what interpreters have been asking for for the last ten years. In the last couple of years the NF has said that displacement is too late. They want no hands. So the question is, do you call what your interpreter wants or what the NF wants. Whichever way you decide to go that night, call it early. Otherwise, you will see handchecking all night long. At our rules clinic this year, the clinician said that if you will call it early, the players get the message and they will stop. But they are waiting for you to set the stage.

While this may not be a popular opinion w/ some, I believe the game needs to be called according to the style of play. Here in Minnesota we have 5 classes for HS basketball. I have the luxury (or headache) of working games in all 5 of these classes. (they are ranked according to school size) It is my firm opinion that each of these games cannot be called the same. I did a semi-final 5A boys game at a holiday tourney about a week ago and I will be the first to tell you that assignors/coaches would have run us out of the building had we called this game as tight as we call some lower level games w/ less skilled players. We were complimented after the game on how we let contact that did not affect the play go and called the pertinent disadvantage. In our area working a big game like this and not affecting the "flow" of the game in mind (and assignors) is how one gets big games. In a sloppy 1A or 2A game yes the slight handcheck or the illegal screen needs to be called early to clean up the game. We also need to penalizer fouls early to set the tone of the game and keep the players safe. However IMO when working a game in which all players on the floor will be playing college ball (one at Oklahoma and another at ball state in the above game i mentioned) one needs to adapt JUDGEMENT of fouls to suit that style of play. One of the biggest atributes to a good official and moving up quickly in our area is calling the game within its style of play. I know some decent officials in our area who struggle to get a decent HS schedule after 10 plus years because they refuse to adapt to this and call the rule book WRITTEN IN STONE. Obviously there are some games where a lot of fouls need to be called. However when two skilled teams are in the bonus in the first quarter because my partner is calling every whif of contect, well sorry that is why I am starting to get college games after 3 years and he gets 8 varsity games after 10. I'm wide open for opinions and critiques on this....

MN3sport
Love that philosophy. You need to recognize how the game is being played and call it accordingly. The faster, stronger, and more skilled the players, the more contact you will see that you will let go. You don't want to be blowing it dead every possession or severely hampering the style of play. Call what you need to and let the players play the game.

Hawks Coach -

As always, I couldn't agree with you more.

As to the "tagging-up" references, I don't think that has been well addressed in this thread at all, but is worth mentioning.

I do agree with Rut to a certain extent, that advantage/disadvantage, north-south v. east-west, and the ability of the players should have an impact on the "hand-checking" call, BUT with that said, i do think "tagging" is an aspect of the game that must be addressed early.

here's why...player a2 is constantly being tagged by b2 (i.e., b2 touches the hip, drops the hand, touches the hip, drops the hand, touches the hip, drops the hand) while he/she is dribbling up court.

at some point a2 gets annoyed/upset/frustrated with the constant "tagging" and begins to swat the defenders arm away. the defender continues to "tag."

now a2, extremely frustrated, uses a forearm or elbow to displace and clear away from b2...

what do you do now? do you call an offensive foul for the big-time displacement? do you call the hand-check that you should have called 5-seconds ago (thus preventing the displacement)? do you have a no call?

For those of you who didn't see it, a similar situation happened in the first half of the Louisville-Kentucky game last week.

My point is this...displacement and ad/disad are keys, but we need to do a better job of recognizing and calling the "tags" because if we don't, we're often left with a situation that is much worse.

Jake

[QUOTE]Originally posted by williebfree
[B]Jake80


How was the "game flow"? Did they do a pre-game conference with that Captians, coaches, table....


In my opinion the "game flow" was like molasses. The visiting team was clearly not prepared for the type of game that was being called. Once the visitors caught on it was hack city. Play in the post was relatively rough with displacement by both offense and defensive players. It was not a thing of beauty to behold by the fans.

There was a pregame with coaches and captains. Couldn't say what was said. As I said, the table messed up the arrow to start the second half. The score and foul counts were not always correct which also contributed to slowing the game down.

You may be right Mick. I had considered that possibility.
However, there was a small factor that changed my mind. I arrived a little early for the boys game in time to observe the end of the girls game. After the game I see one of the game officials come out of the locker room and sit next to a school official. School official's daughter is one of the stars of the team. Daughter comes out of the dressing room and game official gives her a high five. Gave the appearance of impropriety. That had something to do with the "ole boys network" comment.

MN,

I am going to disagree with the italicized portion of this quote, but only in one respect. I think each level game should be called exactly the same. And it should be called exactly as you describe: "let contact that did not affect the play go and call the pertinent disadvantage." That's how every game should be called.

In lower level games, it will take less contact to create a disadvantage; so you may have more fouls in those games. But if the players can play through slight contact -- at whatever level -- then you let it go. If there is contact that gives an unfair advantage, call a foul. Otherwise, play on. This can be applied in 5th/6th grade games as well as college varsity.

Just my opinion,

Chuck

Chuck:

I think we are pretty much on the same page here. My saying that each game couldn't be called the same refered to the amount of contact that could/should/would be considered to not gain an advantage/disadvantage. Thus in retrospective these games are called the same in context to the skill level.

Marshall

MN, I agree that we agree :) I merely wanted to point out that although the number of whistles may increase at lower level games, the basic philosophy remains the same at all levels. If they can play, let 'em. If they can't play through it, blow the whistle.

Chuck

Back to handchecking. . .
 

I know that this is a guideline that is used in the pro game, but it has helped me a lot in my HS and college games. A handcheck becomes a foul, anywhere on the floor, if the ballhandler's speed, balance, or quickness are altered. If the ballhandler is slowed down by the defender, or if the shooter is turned and has to adjust his balance, or if the dribbler's first step is impeded; these are fouls.

It all still comes down to judgment, but I think the "SBQ" guideline makes it a little less individualized and gives the official something concrete to look for other than a hand on the ballhandler. Look for those 3 things and if one is affected, then blow the whistle.

Just something to think about.

Re: Back to handchecking. . .
 

Chuck

Great stuff. I first heard that at a camp this summer and I can't tell you how much those three words have helped my game. BTW - You can about think speed, quickness, and balance as it pertains to all contact, not just handchecking with the ball handler. E.g., think about balance when 2 big post players are going at each other.

Jake

IMO
 

All good officials should call the same game.
Teams and coaches should adjust, not the officials.

Re: IMO
 

Amen to that- on anything that you call,whether it's 3 seconds,contact under the board,etc,etc. If you're consistent in your calls at both ends,nobody should ever have a complaint about the officiating.

Re: Re: IMO
 

I totally agree w/ the consistancy aspect of the game. However are we trying to say here that the amount of contact that causes a 9th grader to miss a shot and is called a foul should be a foul at the college level??? I don't see one getting many assignments after a couple of those calls. Do we call the travel in a varsity HS game when the player slides the pivot foot 6 inches before releasing the ball?? I hope so. However would you call this in a 5th grade saturday game when the result of the "slide" is a pass to an open team mate who makes his/her first layup of the season. I mentioned the ever controversial 3 second call earlier in this post where a player makes an effort to clear but does not get the last 5 inches of his/her foot out of the lane. You can call that 5-6 times in a HS game and get a lot of quizical looks from players and coaches and maybe a little chipping, however do that in a college game at least the NC2A (div 3 and JuCo) that I work and you have a coach telling you to go back and keep reffing junior high as well as an assignor that makes sure you do just that...JMO

Re: Re: Back to handchecking. . .
 

For the post play I look for dislodgement (same thing as balance) vs. SQB.

I totally agree w/ the consistancy aspect of the game. However are we trying to say here that the amount of contact that causes a 9th grader to miss a shot and is called a foul should be a foul at the college level??? [/B][/QUOTE]Nope!

Glad to hear that!!! AMEN I may be a bit charged on this subject, it is just that we have some officials in our area that cannot grasp the "level of play" concept and it makes it very frustrating not only to work w/ them but also to hear them whine about not getting any "good" games and about how the coaches are up their backs all of the time. I really love it when these threads provoke such good discussion not to mention time to vent. That howler monkey tonight won't phase me a bit!!!! :D

Re: Re: Go ahead, call a touch on a stronger dribbler.
 

http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/thumbs.gif

Please cite the post where anyone said to "make it up." http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/stupid.gif

Re: Re: Re: Go ahead, call a touch on a stronger dribbler.
 

Please cite the post where anyone said to "make it up." http://www.stopstart.freeserve.co.uk/smilie/stupid.gif [/B][/QUOTE]

I didn't say anyone said that. But if you are going to call handchecking, you have to have more than a touch. I am not assigned by the NF, so really what the NF wants is only a perimeter. The reality is to call displacement or movement that affects the dribbler.

Peace

My Unique (screwy?) Way of Looking at Things
 

I waited for somebody else to make a reference to this and help me start but nobody did, so here goes. Quoting from
POE #4: The MEASURING up of an opponent (TAGGING) is hand-checking, is not permitted, and is a FOUL. These terms,
measuring and tagging, suggest only a very slight contact to me. With a very light touch a defender can help himself to keep a constant position in relation to the dribbler and help himself by feeling a change of direction perhaps before it could be seen.

Quoting again: DEFENDERS ARE NOT PERMITTED TO HAVE HANDS ON THE DRIBBLER! (their exclamation point, not mine) Hand checking is not incidental contact; it gives a TREMENDOUS advantage. Now we get back to the hard part, judgment. Obviously, like other calls, there are a jillion degrees of hand checks. But, when the defender places his hand on the dribbler, no matter how lightly, it is a deliberate act and the way this POE is written, if it was called a foul with every place of the hand, how could anyone complain? (What percent of coaches know what POE stands for?)

Bottom line (is that sighs of relief I hear?) is that if the hand check gains the defender an advantage, it certainly should be called. If it doesn't gain him an advantage and he gets called for a foul, won't he stop doing it?

Re: My Unique (screwy?) Way of Looking at Things
 

Justa,
Last night, two undefeateds.
I called two or three "Three-count, nothing handchecks" early.
That call went away.
mick

Here is the problem with that
 

just another ref,

The problem I see with that statement, suggest that there is never a time defender can touch a dribbler. The reality is that is not completely true. If a defender is retreating and the touching was kind of a protection from getting ran over, I do not think I will call a handcheck on a defender. Even when we talk about legal guarding position, the rules allow the defender to put their hands up and arms up to protect themselves as long as they are within their vertical plane. This is where judgment comes in. This is why we get paid the big bucks. In my opinion and what I have been taught for several years, call handchecking when the defender directed the dribbler, not just when they touch them. Especially on a retreating defender you do not want to call handchecking when they are not coming out to defend a play. If they are getting beat and the contact did not affect that, leave it alone. See the problem is that NF is trying to cover several states, several skill levels and several styles of basketball. And if you were to work in some of the bigger Christmas Tournaments around here and call a touch as handchecking, you would not be back. Not because you were not applying the rules right, but it is greatly discouraged to call slight contact that does not affect play. And even tagging or a touch on a stationary player in many circles is allowed once, keep doing it is is a foul. But I personally have been talking players out of this action without having to call a foul. Especially early when it appears they want to use their hands to try to measure their opponent with their hands without touching them.

Peace

I like Jeff's way of doing it. If you think they are getting a little to active on the measuring up and it could devolve into something more, talk to them. But in realtiy, there is no significant advantage gained on this type of contact, it just can begin to lead to a little more undesirable activity. If you warn them off the touchy feely stuff and they then choose to continue, hit them with the foul. But let players play the game and call what needs to be called.

A cheap foul on the starting point guard early in the game when no meaningful advantage was gained is not worth calling. It may look like a little message from the ref in the first quarter, but it may turn out to put a player in foul trouble. If you can accomplish the same end (stopping the unnecessary contact) without calling the foul, and not really disadvantage anybody in the process, talk them out of the silly stuff.

Tony, I know you can quote chapter and verse of the rules. But since the handcheck rules aren't commonly enforced that tightly. By stepping in and enforcing tightly without first warning, you do potentially impact the game without having changed the way it gets played.

Regarding Warnings.
 

Hawks Coach,
<li>Dribbler in front court five feet offthe division line being hand touched my defender.
<li>Post Player, back to the board, with the ball faking right and left with defenders hand riding him.
You want a warning? ...On ball?
Except for a few noted exceptions, you have to make the call/no-call. Verbal warnings are acceptable in many cases, but applicable to only off-ball situations.
If you want to coach hand riding by your point guard to test the officials, that is certainly your right, and... your gamble. ;)
mick

Re: Re: My Unique (screwy?) Way of Looking at Things
 

Translation? Does that mean hands on for a count of 3?

Re: Re: Re: My Unique (screwy?) Way of Looking at Things
 

justa,
Yeah, ... a count of three.
I figger that's a pretty long ride for a defender that shouldn't be doing that at all.
Many HS players can be "bothered" by a defender's hand constantly touching them. (<i>Nobody knows I am counting to three, except me.</i>)
Fed says None, Women says two. I say None<font size = 1/2>afterthree</font>. ;)
mick

Re: Here is the problem with that
 

Basically,you can't call a hand-check unless the defender initiates the action.

Re: Regarding Warnings.
 

Don't think I would question these calls - I was referring to the measuring up provisions only. I think the measuring up can be cleaned up by warnings first, then foul calls. And I like your 3 count. Don't know if 3 is the right number, but you have a rule of thumb, you are consistent, and it isn't going to result in a lot of touch fouls. A player has to ask for the whistle, and then you are ready to give it. Sounds great to me.

As for coaching my players to hand-check, I guess I could do it but it wouldn't work anyway. Girls can't handcheck, 'cause they're to busy reaching in to get the ball :)

Cute.
 

Hawks Coach,
Cute choice of words. :)
You are, I assume, teaching them to attack the ball by swatting up. That makes for very rare fouls whether your team hits a wrist or not.
mick

That's not my concern, it's the coach's. If the PG gets an early foul, then he's not going to hand check again, plus the burden is now on him not to get 4 more. He'll have to adjust his game, I'm not going to adjust mine just based on what you or your player are comfortable with. I can't worry about whether he's going to get into foul trouble or not. That's your concern. Tell him not to do it and he won't have a problem.

As I said before, coaches in my area know the crews and know what they're going to call in most cases. They grade film and know which crews watch for illegal screens, handchecking, etc. They know which crews allow which more contact and they know which crews call it tighter. But in any case, a handchecking foul in the 1st quarter should send a meesage to the coaches and player, "Hey, we're not going to put up with that toinight." You'll adjust or you won't. It's up to you.

Well, that doesn't make much sense but if that's what you believe, fine. If I choose to warn about anything, then that's a courtesy. but if you're gaining an advantage, you're not getting a warning. You're getting a foul. Coach' it's a POE. We've been told to call it, and we're doing so in my area.

How much more warning do you need?

Re: IMO
 

THUNDEROUS APPLAUSE

STANDING OVATION

Re: Here is the problem with that
 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JRutledge
[B]just another ref,

The problem I see with that statement, suggest that there is never a time defender can touch a dribbler.
__________________________________________________ _________

Which statement was that?
__________________________________________________ _________


The reality is that is not completely true. If a defender is retreating and the touching was kind of a protection from getting ran over, I do not think I will call a handcheck on a defender.
__________________________________________________ ________

Depends on the touch. You could be retreating and protect yourself with a "Chuck Norris Touch" of some kind.
__________________________________________________ _________

Even when we talk about legal guarding position, the rules allow the defender to put their hands up and arms up to protect themselves as long as they are within their vertical plane.
__________________________________________________ __________

Absolutely true, but what does that have to do with what we were talking about.
__________________________________________________ __________

In my opinion and what I have been taught for several years, call handchecking when the defender directed the dribbler, not just when they touch them.
__________________________________________________ __________

Would that be the same as displacement? I believe that is the term you used earlier.
__________________________________________________ __________
Especially on a retreating defender you do not want to call handchecking when they are not coming out to defend a play.
__________________________________________________ __________

I'm a little vague on this one, but the retreating defender can often be be guilty of a hand check foul as he tries to recover an original position in front of a dribbler.
__________________________________________________ __________

If they are getting beat and the contact did not affect that, leave it alone.
__________________________________________________ __________

Fair enough.
__________________________________________________ __________
See the problem is that NF is trying to cover several states, several skill levels and several styles of basketball.
__________________________________________________ __________

I don't really consider this a problem. This is where that word JUDGMENT comes in. I think we all agree on that. What I do consider a problem is the higher skill levels taking liberties with the rules. This started in the NBA.
It is now solidly entrenched in the college game, and is making strides every year in high school, and even below, in my opinion.
__________________________________________________ __________


And if you were to work in some of the bigger Christmas Tournaments around here and call a touch as handchecking, you would not be back.
__________________________________________________ __________

Right now, this is the least of my worries. They wouldn't hire me anyhow, I wear a belt.
__________________________________________________ __________

And even tagging or a touch on a stationary player in many circles is allowed once, keep doing it is is a foul.
__________________________________________________ __________

I'm lost again. What circles are you referring to now?
__________________________________________________ __________
But I personally have been talking players out of this action without having to call a foul. Especially early when it appears they want to use their hands to try to measure their opponent with their hands without touching them.
__________________________________________________ __________

Off the ball, as mick said, a warning is okay, even though it is not something I do a lot of myself. But what about on the ball? Do you talk to them, too? And why would they be talked out of it so easily if they know you at all. You already said it is not a foul without displacement.
__________________________________________________ __________