Use it or toss it

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by tref

First of all, forgive me if this info is not of value to YOU & also if YOU dont think the info is "worth the money." My hopes are that the info will assist one of our own in improving & help get somebody picked up this summer!!

Ok, so we know what our PCAs are,

http://api.smugmug.com/services/embe...425&height=318

...

Funny seeing the 3 officials who are brought on to the court to demonstrate. One of the guys is really, really good friends with one of the guys you bump heads with from time to time here in the forum.

Shoot, just noticed that one my boys is in the video also.

Guess I do have access to this info after all...LOL

[rockyroad]

The only time I "cringe" about this is when I hear a partner say that they called something right in front of me because it was a "crew call" or they were "helping me out". In almost every case, they called an on-ball foul in a one-on-one situation right in front of me (or a partner) when I had a great look at it and passed. Those words are often used to cover up the fact that they screwed up and made a call they never should have...

When a partner comes and gets a travel while I am locked on contact between the post players, or gets a secondary defender who whacked the shooter on a curl play - those calls are awesome. Those truly are "crew calls" and no one cringes at those.

But we have all worked with people who use the cute little terms they picked up at camp as an excuse for screwing things up on the court. So - we cringe at times.

[brainbrian]

Thanks for the videos. I learned something! Good stuff to think about.

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

The only time I "cringe" about this is when I hear a partner say that they called something right in front of me because it was a "crew call" or they were "helping me out". In almost every case, they called an on-ball foul in a one-on-one situation right in front of me (or a partner) when I had a great look at it and passed. Those words are often used to cover up the fact that they screwed up and made a call they never should have...

When a partner comes and gets a travel while I am locked on contact between the post players, or gets a secondary defender who whacked the shooter on a curl play - those calls are awesome. Those truly are "crew calls" and no one cringes at those.

But we have all worked with people who use the cute little terms they picked up at camp as an excuse for screwing things up on the court. So - we cringe at times.

What Rocky is talking about goes along the line of mastering your 1/3. If you try to "help" someone on a one-on-one in their area, that doesn't really help. All it means is there are two sets of eyes on two players while the other eight players could be killing each other.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

What Rocky is talking about goes along the line of mastering your 1/3. If you try to "help" someone on a one-on-one in their area, that doesn't really help. All it means is there are two sets of eyes on two players while the other eight players could be killing each other.

Exactly...in my pre-games, I always tell my partners that if they see something off-ball that needs a whistle, come and get it - anywhere on the court. There are no PCA's for off-ball stuff as far as I am concerned.

[tref]

I understand what Rocky & some others are saying... there's no need for team officiating concepts on a one on one matchups.
I agree that these concepts may give lesser experienced officials a reason to ball watch, but thats why the discussion started out by defining PCAs & then shows when & why 2 sets of eyes should be on the ball.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by tref

2 sets of eyes should be on the ball.

Maybe that's why I "cringe"...I don't really agree with this. We might need multiple sets of eyes on the play, but the off official should really be looking for "off" things - the travel, double dribble, outside defender reaching in, help defender sliding over.

Saying the eyes should be "on the ball" opens the door to too many potential problems.

[tref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Maybe that's why I "cringe"...I don't really agree with this. We might need multiple sets of eyes on the play, but the off official should really be looking for "off" things - the travel, double dribble, outside defender reaching in, help defender sliding over.

Saying the eyes should be "on the ball" opens the door to too many potential problems.

Yup & knowledge, wisdom & understanding of the concept is the answer to those potential problems.

But to each his or her own, the post was titled "use it or toss it" for a reason...