Although I understand where you are coming from, would you really want to put that kind of potential pressure squarely on the shoulders of a 17 year old kid? :rolleyes:

The only rule that must be changed. Dumb rule to give coaches this opportunity.

Peace

The pressure of what? Mirroring his coach's timeout request?

They handled it for decades just fine until the rule was changed to allow coaches to request the timeouts.

Still don't see the issue with allowing coaches to ask for timeout

The problem is not them asking for a timeout, the problem is the fact they do not understand that we are not paying attention to them. Then again I also remember a time when only players could request the timeouts and somehow the players made the request just fine. I have been involved or seen too many issues come up because the coach thinks we are somehow obligated to pay attention to them. When you have a rule that has to constantly remind people that never pick up a rulebook or watch a rules video on the fact that the officials are not paying attention to them and have other duties, it is time to change the rule back to what it once was.

Peace

What Rut said.

We hear 99% of them just fine, but occasionally you get the coach with a soft voice, or you have a loud gym, or the action is too tense to glance at the coach to verify, or you tuned the coach out after he asked for "over the reaching moving screen you gotta call something" for the fourth time, and the coach spends half the timeout griping about how long it took you to grant the TO.

Kids are simply relaying what the barking coach wants. Well within their abilities as far as I'm concerned.

Somehow they did this long before the rule changed.

Peace

Amen to all that! We had a middle school tournament here about a month ago and one of the star guards was named Tyman! What a giant pain, coach must've said his name about every trip down the floor. Going to be a long four years once he hits high school!

Not sure why a rule should be changed if we hear them fine 99 percent of the time. 2/3 of those situations are on the coach for not being loud enough/signaling a TO along with his verbal request, so I'm not going to feel bad about those situations. The 3rd is a simply byproduct of doing our duties...a la paying attention to what's on the court. Coach will just have to accept that and I'd have no problem telling him/her as much if he/she tries to make a bid deal of it.

Seriously though, the overwhelming amount of timeouts granted via coach's request are easy enough to grant and come at predictable enough times that it isn't an issue...at least from what I've noticed.

In FIBA the coach or assistant coach only can request a timeout through the scorer which is only granted during a deadball. It forces the players to decide the game, not the coaches.

Billy:

I am good but not that good, :D I am working on my First Post. I am going through this thread post by post and writing my responses.

MTD, Sr.

NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:p

MTD, Sr.

Where do I begin? I apologize for the long post.
 

I do not have a problem with allowing this because the rules are pretty clear: To commit a travel violation, one must have Player Control of the ball.


I will go you one better, eliminate the Alternate Possession (an abomination upon the game) Rule and go back to using a Jump Ball to put the ball back into play. (Billy, I know, just shut up, but like Junior and Andy, just let an old man ramble, :D.)

But really, I do not see the problem with how the rule is now.


How is this not different from the rule now?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I like this rule change. There was a time when this rule was necessary but with today's motion offense, if one is camping in the paint he is easy to defend and really isn't helping his team.


A number posters have talked about changes to the Correctable Error Rule. I have no problem with the rule except I would delete the following from the rule (NFHS R2-S8-A6 and NCAA R2-S12-A5): "and there has been no change of team possession since the error was made, in which case play shall resume as after any free-throw attempt(s)." and "and there has been no change of team possession since the error was made. In that case, play shall resume as after any normal free throw."


The current NFHS and NCAA rule has been the women's college rule since before the 1974-75 school year (NAGWS Rules which was an adaptation of the FIBA Rules which is still the same now). The NFHS and NCAA Men's adopted the NCAA Women's Rule (which we have now in the early 1990's). Therefore I have officiated 39 years under the current rule and approximately twenty years under the rule that LoudWhistle would readopt. I really do not care which rule we use.


You are preaching to the choir.


You beat me to my earlier comment.


I like this man's thinking. I would get rid of the restricted are in the NBA/WNBA too. I would get rid of the shot clock every where.


I like it.


There have been a number of posts about the NFHS and NCAA Closely Guarded Rule. My preference is to adopt the NCAA Women's and FIBA Rule which is only while holding the ball anywhere on the court. BUT, don't get your knickers in a bunch. There is no. ten second backcourt in NCAA Women's (FIBA used to be like that but know it has the NBA/WNBA eight second rule in the backcourt.), so the rule would apply only in the frontcourt for NFHS and NCAA Men's Rules.

That's all for now. Have a wonderful time of last minute Christmas shopping everybody.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. Billy, the surgery went fine. I probably could have officiated with Mark, Jr., this past Thursday, but his back needed a rest, :D.