Two-Person "Ball Side Mechanic" ? ? ?

[Freddy]

Over the past eight years here, the one (the only) official I've seen use this mechanic, a guy from a nearby neighboring state assigned to a JV game in our area, would come across, then double up the observation on the competitive matchup outside near the sideline, a matchup the trail had anyway, viturally turning his back on the post matchups behind him. I wasn't impressed.

Properly, speaking, with the ball out on trail's wing and a competitive matchup deep in trail's post, when lead comes across, how far does he go? And does he turn his shoulders square to that post matchup like a three-man lead in a similar situation?

I'm starting to see the attractiveness of this. Like.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Over the past eight years here, the one (the only) official I've seen use this mechanic, a guy from a nearby neighboring state assigned to a JV game in our area, would come across, then double up the observation on the competitive matchup outside near the sideline, a matchup the trail had anyway, viturally turning his back on the post matchups behind him. I wasn't impressed.

Properly, speaking, with the ball out on trail's wing and a competitive matchup deep in trail's post, when lead comes across, how far does he go? And does he turn his shoulders square to that post matchup like a three-man lead in a similar situation?

I'm starting to see the attractiveness of this. Like.

Wow! No wonder you didn't like the mechanic. Yes, the lead comes across the lane area extended similar to 3 person just far enough to get a good post play angle. We have been taught to keep shoulders square to the endline. Also, if the lead rotates back due to ball reversal, don't be too quick to "turn out the lights" on the room you are leaving.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

The odds of this mechanic helping get a better view of post play significantly outweigh the chance of getting burned on your sideline. Marking a three is way less likely than making a decision on contact in the post. I don't cross until the ball is in the post, that minimizes the potential for regret.

Agree.

If the ball is out on the opposite side perimeter and there is a post up situation on the far side, the trail isn't going to be able to cover both and it is much more likely the ball is coming into that post than being skip passed to the other sideline such that there would need to be immediate coverage....and if there is a play the ball will take a while to get there and the trail can pick up a lot of them (if they're across the top).

[Adam]

Freddy,
I'm curious about something. You'd noted that you felt you had good reasons for avoiding the mechanic. Would you care to share those reasons for the betterment of the group?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Adam

Freddy,
I'm curious about something. You'd noted that you felt you had good reasons for avoiding the mechanic. Would you care to share those reasons for the betterment of the group?

1) None of the four or five camps popular in our state even mentioned it in their two-man sessions, that I can discern from those who were in them
2) Nobody I've seen in our area does it
3) Only example of it I've seen here was a guy from a nearby neighboring state who was doing it but was crossing over to observe the match-up out on the wing which his trail had anyway, completely ignoring what was going on behind him in the post as he fixated on action that wasn't his
4) Leeriness over the perceived inability to cover original sideline in case of a skip pass that got away, for instance

But I Have Seen the Light! (Kinda like Joliet Jake in the James Brown church scene). I've been won over by the well-founded defense of the mechanic by highly esteemed posters above. I see how it particularly solves the similar problem I have when our three-man lead, having not yet rotated, reaches over in C's paint and gets a foul call wrong many times due to his being straight-lined. For the two-man crew, the lead, prompt to transition across to view the slot between those two players at the low post from the T's side, has an easier call or no-call to make than a stepped-down or stepped-in trail, methinks. I'm not worried about my above concerns anymore.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Reviewing some resources for newbies today and came across the NFHS two-person ball side mechanic where the lead transitions across the lane to trail's side when all the action is over there.
I've always avoided doing this for what I consider to be a couple of good reasons.

My question to you who regularly do two-person:
Are there any of you who utilize this mechanic on a regular basis?

My question to you if you, like me, avoid this mechanic:
Why do you avoid it?

I use it almost every game.

If a TI is from the T's FC sideline, and usually deep (3pt and below), then I start in this position.

If the T side has many players and/or the next pass is to the post and the T wouldn't have a good look at it, then I'm over.

I'm lucky in that I still have wheels, so getting back over to cover my sideline is not an issue.

[SmokeEater]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I use it almost every game.

If a TI is from the T's FC sideline, and usually deep (3pt and below), then I start in this position.

If the T side has many players and/or the next pass is to the post and the T wouldn't have a good look at it, then I'm over.

I'm lucky in that I still have wheels, so getting back over to cover my sideline is not an issue.

I concur with this method.