Physical tests...

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I do agree with that, but rules tests also do not prove the ability for someone to show knowledge either. Those are silly too.

Oh?

Last year, I ended my season with a JV boys game. My veteran partner called a team control foul on A10 during transition. He then started to line up the kids for B11's free throws.

I didn't see the foul, but an alarm went off in my head. We were in transition, so how else could A10's foul be anything but team control? I went to my partner to check on that, and we corrected it. Team B ball at the division line.

What readied me for that moment? Rules tests, or more specifically, the preparation for such tests. I can't think of a better way to drill these things into our heads.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Oh?

Last year, I ended my season with a JV boys game. My veteran partner called a team control foul on A10 during transition. He then started to line up the kids for B11's free throws.

I didn't see the foul, but an alarm went off in my head. We were in transition, so how else could A10's foul be anything but team control? I went to my partner to check on that, and we corrected it. Team B ball at the division line.

What readied me for that moment? Rules tests, or more specifically, the preparation for such tests. I can't think of a better way to drill these things into our heads.

It depends on how the test is written and administered. Too many officials just show up at some meeting, copy down 100 Ts and Fs in order, and transcribe that information onto the answer sheet.

At least with a fitness test, you'd have to take it yourself.

Best, I think, would be to combine them. Something like: Sprint from one endline to the other (max time 7 secs or so). Answer a rules question within 10 secs. Repeat 5 times, then a 1 min break. Repeat the entire cycle 10 times.

Tests your physical fitness and your ability to be mentally sharp when physically tired.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It depends on how the test is written and administered. Too many officials just show up at some meeting, copy down 100 Ts and Fs in order, and transcribe that information onto the answer sheet.

At least with a fitness test, you'd have to take it yourself.

Best, I think, would be to combine them. Something like: Sprint from one endline to the other (max time 7 secs or so). Answer a rules question within 10 secs. Repeat 5 times, then a 1 min break. Repeat the entire cycle 10 times.

Tests your physical fitness and your ability to be mentally sharp when physically tired.

Well even know here we do not have a fitness test officially, if you are not at a camp and can prove you can get up and down the court it will be obvious. And one of the typical topics of conversation that camp clinicians have are the physical ability of the officials that are being observed. And I can tell you that many that you and I work for in our area eliminate people based on the physical ability of those they observe. That is really the case when those that claim they can work "varsity" after a few years and in camp cannot keep up with better athletes than they are used to seeing in a running clock game. I will take that any day over a time trial.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

Oh?

Last year, I ended my season with a JV boys game. My veteran partner called a team control foul on A10 during transition. He then started to line up the kids for B11's free throws.

I didn't see the foul, but an alarm went off in my head. We were in transition, so how else could A10's foul be anything but team control? I went to my partner to check on that, and we corrected it. Team B ball at the division line.

What readied me for that moment? Rules tests, or more specifically, the preparation for such tests. I can't think of a better way to drill these things into our heads.

If that is the only way you learned, then you either are not taking a NF test and your state/association/chapter gives their own or you are not having discussions or debates with officials during the season. The NF test almost never asked where a ball would be put or if someone would be ejected for certain behavior.

As we speak, our state who administers their own test will not be available until November 1 and will end taking the test on December 5. By November 1 the association that I am President will have already have had 4 meetings. As a state clinician I have been giving presentations in clinics or observed officials several hours since early June. I have also a basketball class in which I teach in the fall that will also have that starts in October and there will be 5 classes with that until November 1. And that does not include all the preparation that I have to personally make in order prepare for my class, the clinics or ask for interpretations to teach the class or run those meetings. And I will have worked 9 games before December 5 when the last date I could theoretically take the exam. And our test is an open book test with only 25 questions (50 total to review if they do the same as football did this year) with questions that not only ask what the rule applies but what we do with the ball or other circumstances of the application. And you are telling me that the only time you review rules is when the test is out? I am sure your system is different than ours on some level, but even if you have to take the exam on one day, I hope and pray you are reviewing the rules a lot more than when the test is going to be taken. I do not by any means consider myself to be a rules expert, but I am often asked many questions about rules in my role as an organizational president and a clinician with my state about how to apply rules. Most questions are not "What is an intentional foul?" Most questions are like we read on this forum where people want to know if they applied the rule correctly and did they give the ball to the right team or were they supposed to eject the coach or the player, not what the wording of an intentional foul is. Why, because they are almost never asked those kinds of questions on rules tests, but questioned if they understand the word for word definition of a rule rather than test all the other aspects of the application. And you will be amazed what people do not know how to apply when they make a call, especially those unusual rules or applications they hardly ever call.

Either you are not being honest with yourself when you actually review rules and situation (I do it mostly with other officials well off the court) or you are one of those that picks up the rulebook one time a year and it never sees the light of day after the test is over. And those are the officials that give 1 shot for an intentional foul when the ball goes in and puts the ball in at half court (more common than you may think).

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And you are telling me that the only time you review rules is when the test is out?

I'm not sure where you inferred that.

I crack a rule book quite frequently. I enjoy rules analysis and application, which is partially why I enjoy forums like these. As for our test, it's closed book, 50 questions for rules, and 25-30 questions on mechanics. We hold three rules clinics prior to the test. I also use RefSchool software, which isn't perfect, but is still a solid tool, just the same.

The example that Bob provided regarding copying down answers is hardly preparation, in my opinion. If that's the norm in some places, no wonder there are some so disillusioned.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

I'm not sure where you inferred that.

I crack a rule book quite frequently. I enjoy rules analysis and application, which is partially why I enjoy forums like these. As for our test, it's closed book, 50 questions for rules, and 25-30 questions on mechanics. We hold three rules clinics prior to the test. I also use RefSchool software, which isn't perfect, but is still a solid tool, just the same.

You are telling me that the rules test is the only reason you pick up a rulebook? You do not have conversations with other officials during the season, off-season or at association meetings? Then what do you do after the test is over? Do you stop picking up the rulebooks the rest of the season or stop having discussions? I get into more discussions at the bar when the game is over than just about any time during the test taking process.

Originally Posted by bainsey

The example that Bob provided regarding copying down answers is hardly preparation, in my opinion. If that's the norm in some places, no wonder there are some so disillusioned.

What Bob described is what takes place in our area because our test is open book and that ideal is endorsed by our higher ups. But if you think there is not other rules discussion, debates or preparation, then you would be sadly mistaken. Football rules are much harder than any basketball rule and application and in that sport I have been involved in similar issues since early June dealing with rules that have more aspects to them and more detail. I was telling someone this weekend I have been talking football at least 2 or 3 times a week since June and want to get to a real game already. Because I am a clinician in basketball and attend camps in the spring, that process has been already for the basketball season since May (season ended in March). It is a 12 month cycle in basketball for sure and these are not even that hard to grasp as I have to deal with working HS and college football.

And as I said before the NF was the test of choice for years and we had to know the difference between what "must" or "shall" more than anything. Or know the inches of the circumference of a basketball or how long the net could be. Great questions of things we will either not measure or probably would not enforce to the point the game is stopped or the item is replace just based on if something is an inch off.

Better yet, the wording in the test was so "cute" that it made no sense and had to be thrown out and did not count towards anyone's score. And it appears there is a lot of delusional behavior when you read this site and people do not know basic things by the nature of their questions and many of those folks are taking closed book tests. I am not seeing the big time benefit to a closed book test.

Peace

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You are telling me that the rules test is the only reason you pick up a rulebook?

For the second time, no.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bainsey

For the second time, no.

What readied me for that moment? Rules tests, or more specifically, the preparation for such tests. I can't think of a better way to drill these things into our heads.

These were your comments, not mine.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

These were your comments, not mine.

Peace

I can't see how his two comments that you're trying to connect have anything to do with each other.