NCAA - Stop clock on OOB or not?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I forget which way the teams are going I go with whistle, opened hand, and just the color with no point.

This one marks you as an experienced official: knowing when to work an advanced mechanic outside the book.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am a bald old geezer who has been officiating (both high school and college) longer than a significant percentage of posters on this Board and I have always (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirely) given the stop clock signal each and everytime when it is appropriate: foul, timeout, and violation. When an official fails to give the signal it gives the impression of being lazy. I remember hearing Edgar Cartotto many many times saying that his officials (when he was the Supervisor of Men's and Women's Officials for the NCAA Div. I Northeast Conf.) had better giving the stopped clock signal. The signal tells everybody involved that the clock must be stopped if running.

MTD, Sr.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am a bald old geezer who has been officiating (both high school and college) longer than a significant percentage of posters on this Board and I have always (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirely) given the stop clock signal each and everytime when it is appropriate: foul, timeout, and violation. When an official fails to give the signal it gives the impression of being lazy. I remember hearing Edgar Cartotto many many times saying that his officials (when he was the Supervisor of Men's and Women's Officials for the NCAA Div. I Northeast Conf.) had better giving the stopped clock signal. The signal tells everybody involved that the clock must be stopped if running.

MTD, Sr.

Let's be honest though. I'm betting the overwhelming majority of timers aren't going off signal but rather hearing the whistle. And even know, at the high levels of college ball and at the pro level, they're using PTS so the clock is going to be stopping automatically 95 percent of the time.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

When an official fails to give the signal it gives the impression of being lazy.

I guess I'm lazy then.

Our local Instructional Chair kind of shrugs about this. He is more concerned with call accuracy and communication.

A shiny turd (I recently heard this myth was proven) is still a turd. A nice stopped clock signal on an inaccurately called play is still a bad call.

YMMV, but locally I...uh, I mean the Instructional Chair is concerned about getting more calls right.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tomegun

I guess I'm lazy then.

Our local Instructional Chair kind of shrugs about this. He is more concerned with call accuracy and communication.

A shiny turd (I recently heard this myth was proven) is still a turd. A nice stopped clock signal on an inaccurately called play is still a bad call.

YMMV, but locally I...uh, I mean the Instructional Chair is concerned about getting more calls right.

What does the Instructional Chair think of these two items:
1. Reporting fouls with two hands (only reporting double # with two hands).
2. In 2-man, not switching on fouls in the backcourt.

[tomegun]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

What does the Instructional Chair think of these two items:
1. Reporting fouls with two hands (only reporting double # with two hands).
2. In 2-man, not switching on fouls in the backcourt.

1. This is something else that takes a back seat to improving our accuracy, communicating with coaches, etc. As an organization, there is only so much improvement we can make and we are going through a culture change. With that said, which one would you rather have, an official who uses one hand and doesn't communicate effectively or an official who uses two hands and does an excellent job communicating? I know this opinion is not only unpopular with some, but not allowed in many areas. There are some officials here who don't agree with this and other things like terminology. The response to that is no terminology exists for some things and being like-minded is a good thing when we put air in the whistle and when we talk to coaches.

2. If you are talking about long switches, we generally do not do them. It wouldn't be a big deal to me really, but I may be crazy. I'm in a 15 round middleweight fight with mother nature so my fitness isn't an issue for things like this. We have several officials that want to put their a$$ to the glass on a throw in staying in the front court. That is something I don't like at all.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by tomegun

1. This is something else that takes a back seat to improving our accuracy, communicating with coaches, etc. As an organization, there is only so much improvement we can make and we are going through a culture change. With that said, which one would you rather have, an official who uses one hand and doesn't communicate effectively or an official who uses two hands and does an excellent job communicating? I know this opinion is not only unpopular with some, but not allowed in many areas. There are some officials here who don't agree with this and other things like terminology. The response to that is no terminology exists for some things and being like-minded is a good thing when we put air in the whistle and when we talk to coaches.

Your point compares two orthogonal elements.

Communication is a skill...some are good at it, some are not.

There is no reason for people to not follow the guidelines on how to report...it doesn't take any particular skill or effort. Reporting with one or two hands is simply a choice. In an area where the standard and expectation is that reporting will be done with one hand, those that still choose to report with two are doing so to "big time" the rest. Even if they are a better communicator, I wonder what else they might try to pull if they think they are above following procedures.

Note that they might still be a very good official but if you have a choice of two good communicators, I'd probably trust the one who doesn't try to show up all the officials who follow the guidelines.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Your point compares two orthogonal elements.

Huh? What?

[APG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Your point compares two orthogonal elements.

Communication is a skill...some are good at it, some are not.

There is no reason for people to not follow the guidelines on how to report...it doesn't take any particular skill or effort. Reporting with one or two hands is simply a choice. In an area where the standard and expectation is that reporting will be done with one hand, those that still choose to report with two are doing so to "big time" the rest. Even if they are a better communicator, I wonder what else they might try to pull if they think they are above following procedures.

Note that they might still be a very good official but if you have a choice of two good communicators, I'd probably trust the one who doesn't try to show up all the officials who follow the guidelines.

Never got the whole line of thinking about feeling "big timed" if an official uses two hands to report or points on an out of bounds call versus using a full hand or not using the stop clock mechanic before signaling a violation. The only thing I care about is if my partner(s) is being accurate in his calls, and is able to communicate it to me, his/her other partner, the table, coach, and players.

And I took tomegun's point to be that we're so worried about stuff that really doesn't matter. One vs. two, stop clock vs not, point vs full hand...all that doesn't matter if you're not being accurate with your calls. Give me an official who's getting 90 percent of his calls correct and a better communicator and uses two hands, doesn't stop the clock vs. the other official who's only 85 percent and uses perfect mechanics but has more issues with communication.

Also, thank you BillyMac for posting yet some more pointless pictures instead of trying to add any substance to the thread.

[Multiple Sports]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am a bald old geezer who has been officiating (both high school and college) longer than a significant percentage of posters on this Board and I have always (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirely) given the stop clock signal each and everytime when it is appropriate: foul, timeout, and violation. When an official fails to give the signal it gives the impression of being lazy. I remember hearing Edgar Cartotto many many times saying that his officials (when he was the Supervisor of Men's and Women's Officials for the NCAA Div. I Northeast Conf.) had better giving the stopped clock signal. The signal tells everybody involved that the clock must be stopped if running.

MTD, Sr.

MTD -

A Dallas Shirley reference !!!!! You have just moves to the top of my list

in the respect department. Dallas is one of the few officials in the the Hall of

Fame. I remember him at a George Tolliver camp back in 89 or 90. What

a great person.


As far as stopping the clock...... north of the Mason Dixon line it is pretty

much standard. Down in Dixie, all of the NBA wannabees will just point !!!!!