also from last night, "how can he he have a closely guarded count while the dribbler is moving forward?"

I've never seen anyone call a handcheck on a shooting foul and I don't think I will be either. At that point, it's usually a push...maybe a hold.

Oh wise members of the board-a couple of years ago someone wrote a list of most misunderstood basketball rules.can whoever posted that post it again?

I have something against calling holds on shots for some reason. Usually call an "Illegal use of hands" on shooting fouls.

Peace

I had a new one tonight. I took a charge in a game (I was playing), and the guy who committed it said, "That can't be a charge, it was in the key." :rolleyes:

I can't say I see many holds on shots, either. It's typically a block, or "illegal contact," as we're instructed to call it. (I suppose all fouls are illegal contact, so it's hard to go wrong there.) I still can't rule out a hand check.

I've always tried to be precise with the type of foul, but I'm starting to get the impression most really don't care.

I don't get the impression that most don't care. I always try to be precise, even adding "non-approved" NFHS mechanics if a player gets hit on the head or something.

But I think the overwhelming majority do see hand checks as a foul on a dribbler. Once a player gets into their shooting motion if the hand is there it is effectively a push or illegal use of hands.

I'm still trying to envision a play where I would even think about calling a hand check on a shot attempt.

I do not know what you mean by thinking others do not care. I think a hand check is not an appropriate foul for a shooting foul. Honestly I wish the NF would open up some of the signals that you see at other levels to be more descriptive. Hand checking be what has been described has always been on the ball handler and preventing movement with the ball. Shooting fouls usually involve another set of contact IMHO.

Peace

For that matter, until a few years ago, there was no such foul as a hand check. Every single hand check could properly be described as either a hold, a push, or illegal use of hands. Hand check is really redundant but offer just a bit more of a descriptive term.

...as I also do.

JR...how do you VERBALIZE it"?

I hate saying 5 or 6 syllables when reporting...so I usually don't...I just give them the color, number and visual foul signal on an "illegal use of hands".

I like the one syllable fouls (getting rid of the ing)...block...push...hold...charge...

the two syllable fouls...hand check...

the three syllable fouls...team control...double foul (I do verbalize "foul" on this for some reason...probably becuase it is not seen much and it is only two words)

even the four syllable fouls...intentional...player control...technical foul(using "foul" for the same reason listed above)

but that crazy six syllable, four word foul...illegal use of hand...is hard to spit out and sounds weak...IMO.

Don't say anything -- just give the signal.

"White -- 32" (signal) "two shots'

Or, say "hit" or "hack"

Yes...I usually don't say anything...just give the signal.

I have tried the "hit" verbage...not bad, I suppose.

I have heard an official use the "hack" verbage...didn't really like it.

I can always use my one word substitute..."boom"...but suggest others not try this at home (or away for that matter) ;)

I will verbalize whatever it takes to get info to the coaches. Sometimes it may be silence on an obvious foul. But I say all kinds of things: grabbed his arm; hit to the face; trip; push in the back; on the elbow. Cuts down on those "what did he do" sidebars.

Sounds good...but what do the evaluators at the State playoffs tell you about it?

Bingo. I just go with whatever seems to come first to my mind.

That said, I will *always* show a hit to the head on a drive regardless if it's in the mechanics chart or not -- especially if it's contact that would likely receive a pass had it been anywhere else -- I want the coaches to know I called it because of the head contact.