What do you mean by the term 'bird dogging?' I have heard it but don't have a clue as to what it means. Forgive my ignorance, but I have never played basketball. Thanks!

Bird-dogging is when the ref uses one hand to point at the person they are calling the foul on while the other fist is in the air...not usually done at any level but HS and below...

Thanks, rockyroad!

And not even in HS (during my games, anyway!) :)

As a returning referee (with a desire to move up), I have noted many changes in the "fashion" of basketball refereeing. V-neck shirts, Fox 40 whistles, Smitty lanyards. Today the lead administers free throws and we no longer "work to our left."

While some of these are truly fashion changes, most are improvements of some kind. I am puzzled whether the bird-dog/not-to-bird-dog question is a matter of fashion, or if there is some kind of evolutionary mechanics improvement at work. I have no desire to start a holy war, but could somebody please enlighten me on the nature of the debate?

Still used in the NCAA.
 

Actually rocky, NCAA Men's still uses this quite often. It is still in the CCA Men's Manual and is used by many D1 Officials still. But it is only to be used for clarification.

Peace

Re: Still used in the NCAA.
 

I would side with "not usually done". It is sometimes used, but it is becoming more and more rare. And as Rut points out, it is now only to be used in cases where it is unclear who the foul is on.

I rarely birdog, and in my neck of the woods it is almost never done in college games.

To address BITS's question, I think the reason it's been phased out is that people felt that pointing to the fouler just wasn't necessary most of the time; and it could, in heated situations, conceivably make a bad situation worse by irritating the fouler unnecessarily. So why do it? The only real reason to do it is if there might be confusion as to who got called for the foul. So that's the only time we do it now.

Chuck

Re: Re: Still used in the NCAA.
 

I was surprised as to the number of times I saw the Men's officials bird-dog through-out the NCAA Tourney.
It was used more than I thought it would be used.

According to CCA Mens' mechanics, bird-dogging is optional.
According to CCA Women's mechanics, bird-dogging is not an option.
mick

Re: Re: Re: Still used in the NCAA.
 

I would have to agree with that, mick. While overall I think it's being used less, I was surprised at how often I saw it in the tourney.

Well, I learned something today. I was using "birddog" mechanics and thought it was the right way.
Thanks for clarifying. Will try to call fouls without the one hand vertical and other horizontal.

Appreciate the clarification, even though I didn't post the question.

Chris

Hey Chris,

If you're still doing HS games, then by all means keep bird-dogging. Don't pick up my bad habits. It's still in the HS manual (pg. 35, Section 230 b; signal #5). It's only being phased out at the NCAA level and above.

Chuck

Check with your assignor. Ours is adamant that we always do it. I know of others that are more relaxed about it. It's still in the book, so if your assignor wants it, KEEP IT!

Still there.
 

It is still in the CCA Manual too (Men's), so I would not say it is being phased out. The CCA Men's Manual just does not require it for all fouls.

Peace

Re: Still there.
 

Well, as I said, it only needs to be used when it's unclear who the foul is on. Would you be happier if I said it's being "scaled back"? :rolleyes:

Thanks all for giving me a chance to play Reagan with Gorbechov (sp?).

Trust but Verify with thy assignor <g>

Even though I'm not calling again until this fall, still keep up with the board. Always food for thought and great ideas on mechanics/rules interpretations.

Keep it up.
Chris

Re: Re: Still there.
 

There might be a "scaling back" in your area, but around here we are instructed to still use it if you are doing "Men's games." And when I watch the Big Ten or Big 12 and Conference USA, it is still used greatly in those games. And if you are doing a NF game, you better birddog on every foul if you are going to make the evaluators happy.

Peace

Re: Re: Re: Still there.
 

Not only is there a scaling back in my area, but there's a scaling back in the NCAA manual. As you noted yourself it's in the manual, but. . .
It used to be required for all fouls. It's no longer required for all fouls. It's been scaled back.

Chuck

In Texas at the H.S. level our state Assoc. says bird dogging is optional, although our local chapter doesn't want us to do it at all.

Not during my career.
 

I have not been officiating for decades, so understand that I do not have 20 years in of experience on this particular issue. But not using the birddog has been the same way for several years, or at least the years I have been officiating. I have never known of a time (during my officiating career) that the birddog was ever used for all fouls. So personally I do not know how it can be scaled back if it has stayed the same in about 8 years. Seems to me they just changed the usage, but it was still used by the D1 Officials all through the NCAA Tournament. And the birddog has stayed the same throughout my career at the NF level. So at least during my career, there has been no scaling back.

Peace

Re: Not during my career.
 

Your point, while possibly interesting (but possibly not) and very likely true, is completely irrelevant. There was a time when the birddog was supposed to be used for all fouls. Now, the birddog is NOT supposed to be used for all fouls. It has been scaled back. Your personal experience of using the birddog makes not the least difference as to the truth or falsity of my statement above.

My statement above is true. Whatever else you want to say about birddogging is fine with me. Have a day.

OK.
 

Well it has been the same in the books for about ten years. Does not seem like a whole lot of change to me. Designs for cars change more than that.

Peace

Re: OK.
 

Do you have some compulsive disorder that makes you repeat irrelevant facts? Hey, fine with me.

Those are simple,concise and 100% correct statements.

That's the bottom line!

The real Chuck comes out.
 

This shows your true colors. This is why I always find you interesting. Everytime someone does not see things your way, you resort to name calling and insults.

You have not mentioned the year that a change was made. I said at least since the time I have been officiating the mechanics on birddogging have stayed the same. You have not stated the year the change was made. I have never remembered a time in my life when NBA officials birddogged at all. NCAA Men's Officials have always birddogged that I can remember and still do quite often. I do not watch or did not care about Women's or Girl's basketball before I became an official, so I have no idea what was going on there before.

I guess the glass is half full to one, half empty to another. But then again, maybe it just stayed the same (ten years is not much change in my opinion).

Peace

Re: The real Chuck comes out.
 

I neither insulted you nor called you a name. You made a point which was correct but not relevant to the issue at hand. I pointed that out to you and you responded by making the same irrelevant point. I was merely asking if you did this out of some compulsion, like people who can't stop washing their hands. I think probably it was a little insensitive to people who truly do have compulsive disorders, and for that I apologize to anyone I offended. But I did not insult you in any way.

Irrelevant. The change was in fact made. That's not up for debate. I only need 2 facts to make my point and that's the first one. The change was made.

Quote:

I have never remembered a time in my life when NBA officials birddogged at all.

Again, irrelevant, since we are only talking about NCAA mechanics.

Irrelevant. Again, true. But irrelevant. They will probably always bird-dog when the fouler is not clear.


Only there? ;)

As I said previously, bird-dogging used to be required on every foul called in the NCAA. It is no longer required on every foul called in the NCAA. It has been scaled back.

Have a day!

Re: Re: The real Chuck comes out.
 

And umpires used to wear outside protectors once upon a time too. But because that is true, I would not call that change a scaling back because that is no longer the case in Baseball Umpiring. One time it was the case, but that has changed more than 10-15 years ago. But then again, I have a right to my opinion and the way I look at the situation. Because when I look around, things have been the same for a very long time. Oh well. :rolleyes:

Peace

Re: Re: Re: The real Chuck comes out.
 

I can agree with that. I would call that more like being phased out. . . .

Rut and Chuck. Chuck and Rut.
 

You guys are wrongo !!!!
Honigs is still selling those big pillows.
So, "HA!" ...to both of you.
mick

<HR>
My wife told me, "It's a fact that men are too opinionated."