Help with the proper signal

[ballgame99]

I worked a MS game the other night and had a designated throw in spot violation; the kid moved a couple large steps to his left to get the ball in bounds when he was supposed to remain stationary. What is the signal for this violation? I KNOW its not the travel signal but I used it anyway because I wasn't sure what else to do. Anyone?

[JRutledge]

He is not supposed to remain stationary, he is supposed to stay over the designated spot, big difference.

That being said if you call the violation, you signal the stop clock signal and then you point to the floor at the spot of the violation back and forth. Then you signal the direction you are going because of the violation.

For a visual sequence, Signal 2, 26 and 6 in that order (Back of rulebook).

Peace

[tref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

For a visual sequence, Signal 2, 26 and 6 in that order (Back of rulebook).

Would it be acceptable to add #7 following #6?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by tref

Would it be acceptable to add #7 following #6?

If #7 is "throw in spot", then it should be added, but it's pretty obvious where it will be.

[ballgame99]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

He is not supposed to remain stationary, he is supposed to stay over the designated spot, big difference.

I understand, but thanks for pointing this out just in case. Thanks!

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tref

Would it be acceptable to add #7 following #6?

Yes, but I do not think many people will be that confused where the spot will be following the violation. And this would only matter to someone that really, really is being picky IMO.

Peace

[tref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If #7 is "throw in spot", then it should be added, but it's pretty obvious where it will be.

Doing an act repeatedly, makes it become a natural act.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes, but I do not think many people will be that confused where the spot will be following the violation. And this would only matter to someone that really, really is being picky IMO.

Peace

Practice doesnt make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect.

When explaining signals to an official (that obviously doesnt know) I think its best to give them everything.
If I were truly "being picky" then I would've said add #7 twice as the calling official indicates the throw-in spot & the administering official designates it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tref

Practice doesnt make perfect, perfect practice makes perfect.

When explaining signals to an official (that obviously doesnt know) I think its best to give them everything.
If I were truly "being picky" then I would've said add #7 twice as the calling official indicates the throw-in spot & the administering official designates it.

That sound wonderful and do not miss the point. If you are the one putting the ball in that spot, if you call a designated spot throw in, you are mostly doing that for "show" as you will put the ball back at the very same spot. And it is only right if the people you work for cares. Next thing you will tell me you will be upset if someone gives #31 and their arm is directly in front of their body.

Peace

[tref]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

That sound wonderful and do not miss the point. If you are the one putting the ball in that spot, if you call a designated spot throw in, you are mostly doing that for "show" as you will put the ball back at the very same spot. And it is only right if the people you work for cares. Next thing you will tell me you will be upset if someone gives #31 and their arm is directly in front of their body.

Peace

Oh really? Me indicating the spot (after my calls) & designating the spot (before administering) is not for a show.
I think it communicates to the players, coaches, table & fans what can & cant be done once the player has the ball.

Yes, IAABO cares...

For one, I dont get upset & especially not over something "others" do. I cannot control that, but I can control giving information in its entirety.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by tref

Oh really? Me indicating the spot (after my calls) & designating the spot (before administering) is not for a show.
I think it communicates to the players, coaches, table & fans what can & cant be done once the player has the ball.

So you are telling me that if a designated spot violation takes place, players, coaches, table and fans are going to be confused on that specific spot after the violation? Really? you realize I am talking about this specific situation, not every other foul or violation or dead ball situation? So yes you are probably right as it relates to the book, but you are not necessarily right as to what someone would be confused by. If they are that confused, they probably have not watched many basketball games in their life.

Originally Posted by tref

Yes, IAABO cares...

For one, I dont get upset & especially not over something "others" do. I cannot control that, but I can control giving information in its entirety.

OK, who cares about IAABO? I do not belong to IAABO or work for any group that has anything to do with IAABO. And don't IAABO have different mechanics than the NF?

And I am a certified clinician in my state and if someone did not point after doing all the other mechanics properly and in order, I probably would not notice or care to mention it in an evaluation either way. There are other things that I am sure I would have noticed and that would be extremely minor and picky to me to mention. Usually there are so many other things that need attention and this is not high on the list. I cannot speak for others, but something tells me they would hardly not say anything either.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am a certified clinician in my state and if someone did not point after doing all the other mechanics properly and in order, I probably would not notice or care to mention it in an evaluation either way.

JRutledge: I understand, and may even agree, with your philosophy, as stated above. However, as a certified clinician in Illinois, would you teach rookie officials all the proper signals in the correct order, as required in your little corner of Illinois, or would you just teach them the signals that you think are important?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge: I understand, and may even agree, with your philosophy, as stated above. However, as a certified clinician in Illinois, would you teach rookie officials all the proper signals in the correct order, as required in your little corner of Illinois, or would you just teach them the signals that you think are important?

Here we go . . .

When it comes to the ice cream cone of "proper signalling", there could well be more flavors than Baskin Robbins. Some are based on what has been accepted regionally, some is straight and by the NFHS book, some is in perfect accord with the IAABO book, some is based on what one's local clinician or assigner expects, some is based on what one's state requests, some is based on the idea that it doesn't really matter--judgement is what's important, and some is based on "that's how I've always done it and everyone else is stupid".

Best to conform to what expected of you where you're at.

Since the contributors to this forum come from so many different areas whereby the flavors of the ice cream cone are slightly different, it's unrealistic to yield a universal answer to the original post. Check your local listings.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge: I understand, and may even agree, with your philosophy, as stated above. However, as a certified clinician in Illinois, would you teach rookie officials all the proper signals in the correct order, as required in your little corner of Illinois, or would you just teach them the signals that you think are important?

Actually Billy it is not about teaching or not teaching certain things. It is about what I would get upset by or what I would "downgrade" an official for if they were at camp or at a training. The new officials I come in contact with have a hard time getting their arm up with any confidence or using their voice, let alone giving the proper sequence of a violation and foul. If I worried about doing all the signals like you suggest, I would constantly be writing on evaluation camp forms to suggest what a horrible job they are doing. I want them to get the plays right and communicate the proper information, not some sequence that may or may not mean something to them. Actually it would be the veteran or more seasoned officials that I would be worried about their sequence of signals.

If a new official does not point (again) to the floor on a spot that is coming back to the same spot, I think I can get over that very quickly. Also I teach mechanics in the largest concentration of the state of official and population. So there is no "little corner" that you are talking about from my experience.

I belong (Either sat on board or am a current board member of two of those organizations) to probably 3 of the largest organizations in the entire Chicago land area and often help out with clinics and trainings yearly. And again, I am talking about one little thing at the end of a very specific situation, not every other form of communication when the spot is not obvious or clear. Then again I do not point to the spot on many violations if I am the covering official for the next throw-in and I cannot recall anyone saying a word to me to change. And it certainly not hurt my career.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Actually Billy it is not about teaching or not teaching certain things. It is about what I would get upset by or what I would "downgrade" an official for if they were at camp or at a training.

JRutledge: When it's not about teaching, I can agree with you in regard to evaluations, and only nit-picking on the important things. I believe that we can agree on that.

I'm the one who shifted the question from evaluation to teaching (I'm a retired 30 plus year science teacher, and have served on both my local board's rules training committee, and the mechanics training committee). Now can you please answer my question:

As a certified clinician in Illinois, would you teach rookie officials all the proper signals in the correct order, as required in The Prairie State, or would you just teach them the signals that you think are important?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

JRutledge: When it's not about teaching, I can agree with you in regard to evaluations, and only nit-picking on the important things. I believe that we can agree on that.

I'm the one who shifted the question from evaluation to teaching (I'm a retired 30 plus year science teacher, and have served on both my local board's rules training committee, and the mechanics training committee). Now can you please answer my question:

As a certified clinician in Illinois, would you teach rookie officials all the proper signals in the correct order, as required in The Prairie State, or would you just teach them the signals that you think are important?

Billy, I actually answered your question. Unless you have a different definition of what teaching means, I clearly told you what I do. The teaching never stops between the class, meetings and clinics that I am apart of, there is constant teaching of officials and I tell them what they need to know. Some need to know more than others. Remember, we do not have the same structure you have from everything to assigning or evaluations.

Peace