My New #1 Myth

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by fiasco

What, do you want fans and coaches to yell "That's an illegal push in the back on the rebound!!" Come on.

You're missing the point.

A push is not OVER the back. "Over" means zero contact. Look at FortMoney's "breaking the plane" example. THIS is the myth, and the words we choose can make or break myths.

You can't be afraid of looking "high and mighty" when dealing with these terms. You can get your point across without doing so. We're the officials. If we're not going to call "over the back" fouls, then perhaps we should say so.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by tref

Why hold back?

Coach: Over the back.
Official: No contact no foul, coach.
At this level on the next dead ball you could explain that on the back is a foul but over the back minus contact isnt. Sometimes on the back that doesnt result in possession consequence wont get a whistle.

Coach: He's reachin' in.
Official: Again, no contact no foul, coach.
At this level on the next dead ball you could explain how it would be tough for defenders to get steals without reaching.

JMO

I guess I assumed he was talking about fan comments. Best to hold back.

If he's talking about coaches, at the 5th/6th grade level, then I will give one quick "he didn't touch him" or "it's not illegal to reach, coach." After that, one warning that I don't need his help.

If that doesn't work, we're shooting free throws.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

"Pushing" "Displacement"

When a coach uses one of those terms (or some form thereof), my respect for him/her goes way up.

I had one use displacement earlier this season, except he was mocking my proper use of it a few minutes earlier. He earned my ignoring him for the rest of the half with that nonsense.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by bainsey

A push is not OVER the back. "Over" means zero contact.

To you, maybe. To some (most?) it INCLUDES zero contact, but it also includes contact that isn't a foul, and contact that is a foul.

I think it's incorrect to say "over the back is never a foul." It might (or might not) be a foul -- and that's why it's insufficient to ... ask for? ... an over the back call.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by bainsey

A push is not OVER the back. "Over" means zero contact.

On the contrary, when the player on the outside gets the rebound, coaches and fans yell "Over the back!" with no contact, or if their player got planted in the wall. It's not going away. Get over it.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by bainsey

You're missing the point.

A push is not OVER the back. "Over" means zero contact. Look at FortMoney's "breaking the plane" example. THIS is the myth, and the words we choose can make or break myths.

According to your definition. A lot of coaches and fans use over the back to communicate that their player is getting pushed or otherwise displaced from behind by another rebounder, and it has nothing at all to do with the hands or arms.

I just had a game on Friday where two players went up for a rebound. Player from behind jumped into the back of the other player, displacing him and causing him to lose the rebound. I reported at the table a pushing foul. The coach, as I walked by, said "Please keeping watching the over the back like that. They've been doing it all night."

Just because you interpret a term to mean one thing doesn't mean everyone else does.

To me, when I hear "over the back," I just know people (coaches/fans) are irritated about rebounding action. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't let myself get all hot and bothered about it.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think it's incorrect to say "over the back is never a foul." It might (or might not) be a foul -- and that's why it's insufficient to ... ask for? ... an over the back call.

Exactly. Instead of spending your time worrying about whether or not it is a basketball "myth," spend your time engaging in constructive communication with coaches and players. Arguing about whether or not "over the back" is a myth, or what its exact meaning is, is a waste of time. Just be responsible for your own proper communication.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by fiasco

According to your definition. A lot of coaches and fans use over the back to communicate that their player is getting pushed or otherwise displaced from behind by another rebounder, and it has nothing at all to do with the hands or arms.

I just had a game on Friday where two players went up for a rebound. Player from behind jumped into the back of the other player, displacing him and causing him to lose the rebound. I reported at the table a pushing foul. The coach, as I walked by, said "Please keeping watching the over the back like that. They've been doing it all night."

Well had they? You'd been missing fouls all night? I doubt that. My guess is the coach thought they were all fouls, even the ones where they just reached over the back. You finally got an actual foul, called it, and the coach thinks you've been missing a bunch. Just because the coach agrees that it was a foul doesn't mean he knows why.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Exactly. Instead of spending your time worrying about whether or not it is a basketball "myth," spend your time engaging in constructive communication with coaches and players. Arguing about whether or not "over the back" is a myth, or what its exact meaning is, is a waste of time. Just be responsible for your own proper communication.

Really? Isn't that what you're doing here?

[KCRC]

I thought I understood the discussion until Bainsey's, Eastshire's and JAR's latest responses.

Are you saying that coaches and fans ask for an "over the back" call when there is NO contact? I can't say that I've ever heard a coach ask for a foul with NO contact (unless the coach mistakenly believed there was contact). If that is true, then yes, that is a rules myth that I believe needs to be addressed at an appropriate time. I just can't remember ever hearing that from anyone.

That is something completely different than a request for an "over the back" foul when there is contact that is judged to be legal and/or incidental. In those situations, I just interpret the "over the back" request as the coach's or fan's biased opinion that the contact was not incidental but illegal contact, a judgement call not a rule myth. In this case, whether the coach says "over the back" or "pushing" or "displacement," I don't think it really matters?

[Adam]

Most of the time you're right, but when you work lower level games (MS and below), this myth pervades among fans and coaches. Mostly fans. When I decide to hear some fans, I hear this as often as the 3 second request. It doesn't bug me, but I find it sad.

I had to laugh out loud last week, in a middle school game, when the fans started screaming, "You've got to call something."

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by KCRC

I thought I understood the discussion until Bainsey's, Eastshire's and JAR's latest responses.

Are you saying that coaches and fans ask for an "over the back" call when there is NO contact? I can't say that I've ever heard a coach ask for a foul with NO contact (unless the coach mistakenly believed there was contact). If that is true, then yes, that is a rules myth that I believe needs to be addressed at an appropriate time. I just can't remember ever hearing that from anyone.

That is something completely different than a request for an "over the back" foul when there is contact that is judged to be legal and/or incidental. In those situations, I just interpret the "over the back" request as the coach's or fan's biased opinion that the contact was not incidental but illegal contact, a judgement call not a rule myth. In this case, whether the coach says "over the back" or "pushing" or "displacement," I don't think it really matters?

Constantly. Its worse the lower the level you go.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by KCRC

Are you saying that coaches and fans ask for an "over the back" call when there is NO contact?

Absolutely. Just like any other call, they yell for the outcome which benefits their side. Any touch of the backboard is a T. Any fumble of the ball is a travel.
ANYTHING that happens near the division line is a backcourt violation. etc.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Really? Isn't that what you're doing here?

Yes, it is a waste of my time. I should probably get some work done.

Acting as if banding together as a brotherhood of officials to put a stop to the horrible myth of "over the back" is going to get people to stop saying it is just silly.

[tref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Absolutely. Just like any other call, they yell for the outcome which benefits their side. Any touch of the backboard is a T. Any fumble of the ball is a travel.
ANYTHING that happens near the division line is a backcourt violation. etc.

Dont forget hiGH dribbLES are carries.