Many areas don't do this. I agree with those who don't. There's no need to volunteer this information, and sometimes the scorekeeper gives the incorrect information, and soemtimes the official reports it wrong and sometimes the coach hears it incorrectly.

Many (most?) areas just "Blue, 24" signal (no voice), "two shots" (or whatever).

I know what you were talking about, but what I was asking is why do you feel the need to SAY anything at all about the type of foul. Why not just use the hand signal and say nothing?

I signal the type of foul with no voice. Most people I work with do the same.

This is one of those areas where I'm sure you're right (about it being best practice), but I do it anyway. For the most part, I keep track of the timeouts used in my head (I want to remember if a team is out of 30s or 60s cause it makes TO administration easier, IMO) and if I ask the scorer, it's just to verify that I'm right.

We have discussed this before and have had a great debate about it. I do not seek out any timeout information. If the table tells me they are out and the nature of our mechanic to go to the bench and stay there, I might tell them they are out. But I do not want to go out of my way just to give them this information. If the table never tells me I am OK with that. These teams have people that keep track of that, I would rather they do their job and communicate to their team, not have officials do it for them. Half the time when I ask a coach what kind of time out they want, they already know what they have left.

Peace

Oh, I agree officials should know this. I just don't volunteer the information to the coach (until it gets to zero).

I am more descriptive. I say the foul they actually committed while giving the proper signal. I learned this at a camp and it works like a charm. I cannot think of the last time I had a single coach question what they did. They might claim something happened first.

Peace

That is actually how I was originally taught as well. But we evolve sometimes and decide to try something else. There really is not a right or wrong with this.

Peace

I do it cause that's how I was taught, never realized or noticed a difference. I will not voice the signal on my next game and watch the film on it. I may end up liking not voicing the signal more.

Why do you feel the need to check with scorekeeper to keep coach informed if he has 2,3,4 timeouts left.

The whole point is table tells you he has one left...YOU tell coach, table then finds mistake later in game and guess who gets blamed when he calls a TO and there isn't one left? You're right, not the table. Why act as his concierge?

Personally, I could care less when officials tell me how many TOs a team has left unless he's out. That said can't remember any Varsity partners telling me TO situation unless out. Just useless stuff.

I also don't want to train coaches to ask me how many TO they have which you mentioned(can't ever recall a varsity coach asking me how many they have left).

I do not try to keep track of timeouts throughout the game and would rather a partner NOT tell me when they are or come back from the table and say "white has 2 fulls and a 30 and blue has 3 fulls." I just smile and kinda think, good for them.

End of the game, yes I will make sure I know if they have 1 or Zero left. That's all I want to need and know.

As for verbalizing signals I really don't say anything other than maybe "body" with the push mechanic on plays to make sure people know where the contact was if up top was clean. I think sometimes I do say, "hit" on the illegal use of hands signal. Probably out of habit but I don't do it nearly as often as I use to.

ETA- The one signal verbalized more often than not by me and those I observe is on Player Control.

Right, "Blue, 24, Illegal" for me. (Sometimes I say "use," sometimes not.)

As for the "reach/over the back," if it's a newer official, I offer advice later when we're off the floor. If it's a vet, I don't bother. It also makes me cringe, but I don't think face-palming is an approved mechanic.

The only value I see in keeping track of timeouts is to help expedite the process if I know a coach is out of one type or the other. When I know that, I don't have to bother asking which one they want.

This just seems overly redundant to me and utterly useless.

I also have always found it silly when anyone says "hit". But a lot of people do it, so maybe I'm the one who has a problem...

If you know a coach only has 30s (or fulls), then you can just grant and report the TO. You won't need to ask a question with an obvious (to the coach) answer. More than one coach has become iritated at that question. Perhaps they shouldn't, but why even give them the chance?