I don't for the same reasons given...why signal something that's not happening???....BUT...I have no problem with anyone who uses these signals...They're just not for me. I can't say I've never caught myself a time or two using them, though... :cool:

Well at least you can say you're consistent...:p :D

Touche.

+1 I tell the table, no matter how obvious they thought it was, look for the signal. "If he shoots from the backcourt and you don't see the signal, put 2 on the board. If it's wrong, let it be on us, not you."

Likewise.

I still don't know whether it's an approved mechanic here in the northeast corner, but I've seen it done plenty of times to make me believe it's accepted.

Why show 2 fingers to signal a 2 pointer? If your hands are NOT up ITS NOT a 3. I point to the ground on close to the line shots in my primary so my partner KNOWS I got a look at is (same thing for coaches and anyone else who cares to notice) but mainly for my partner.

Good question. The answer is CLARITY.

How many times have we looked at a 19-ish foot shot and wondered, was that a two or a three? The two fingers at the table -- with a second of eye contact -- drives home the point, "I saw it. It was a two." It removes a lot of doubt from the table and benches.

Side question: How many of you haven't bothered to get the three fingers up on a ridiculously wild shot (from 20-21 feet, not a halfcourt), only to have it bank in? I've been caught twice, including last week. Both arms sure went up quickly!

APG'er:

With apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirley, I have never (both in college games and H.S. games) used the "not closely guarded signal" for the reason you give: If I am not showing a visible five second count it means I do not have a CGS.

There have been several times both in college game and H.S. games when a HC has questioned me about a CGS and they get this look: :confused:, when I tell them my reasoning for not giving the "not closely guarded signal". I just love the look on their faces: :confused:.

MTD, Sr.

That's fine, but the benefits of using the not closely guarded signal outweigh the benefits of not using it IMO...

With one signal, I can stop a coach begging for a count because he's perceived me not to be paying attention...one signal tells the coach that I'm paying attention to the criteria needed and that it's not being met. In addition it shows up on tape. Plus if you're in a situation where you have a count in your partner's area (count started in your primary), it's a more visible signal for a partner that you've given up the count and that he can pick up the match up.

To me, provided signals are given in a professional manner and provided it's used at the correct time, it can't hurt to give more information when useful and needed. Of course, this all assumes it's not in conflict with "when in Rome."

As others have said, it conveys that a decision was made

Exactly. They often do not watch us anyway if we signal a 3 point shot and this tells everyone I saw it if they happen to see us during a close possible 3 point shot. If we do nothing they assume we are incompetent and were not looking at the play.

I only give the "not closely guarded signal" when players are standing around. I do not give it when it is obvious that a player is further away than 6 feet.

Peace

I agree, no need to use it when it's obvious...that's just going to tire one's arms out. :D

No sir, I don't. I raise 3 fingers when he shoots from behind the line.

"Not closely guarded" is an approved signal.

No, I did not use it before it was approved.

I just look at the scoreboard to see if they added 2 or 3.

Ignore it... Based on your description, in my opinion he was not showing you up. "Coach the shooter's foot was on the line." Is all you need to say then get out of there.