Long Switches

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

Let's say I buy what you're selling: Why don't we switch then on shooting fouls where the trail makes the call?

We (in Oregon) do. Our state rejected the NFHS change on that mechanic. Word has is that the NFHS committee never voted on that particular change but it somehow made into the final list of changes.

Originally Posted by Rich

We switch often enough. No reason to do so on long switches and on switches where things feel forced. Leave it up to the crew to decide which switches make sense and which ones don't.

I don't disagree, but it is probably a lot easier to teach that we switch on all fouls rather than try to define all the possible things that could be a long switch.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Proper mechanics is a part of good officiating. Proper switching is a part of good mechanics. When I work a game, I have three "official" sets of eyes watching me, my partner, and the two junior varsity officials, who will go home that night and give me a rating. This rating, along with some other criteria (peer rating is 80%), will determine my ranking among my 325 colleagues, which will determine the number of games, as well as the level of the games, that I'm assigned the following season. Mechanics makes up 10% of the "nightly" rating, and proper switching is a part of proper mechanics. So if the "book" says that I'm supposed to switch after every foul, even long switches, then I'm switching after every foul. After thirty-two years, it's automatic for me. Why not do it the proper way? Really. Why not? I'm getting $89.76 to work the game, so why would I try to save a few steps by avoiding a long switch, that, in the long run, could cost me a few assignments next year? Why?

Do what you need to do in your area, but please don't even suggest this is the "best" way to officiate. There are many ways to do this.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The point of switches is that it ensures that both teams get relatively the same coverage from each official through out the game.

That is the intention, certainly, but like most things, it doesn't always work.


Extreme example: You play 4 minutes without a whistle, then have a foul. 10 seconds later, another foul. Then 3:50 without a whistle. Around here, unless it is inconvenient not to do so, we don't switch on the second foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

Do what you need to do in your area, but please don't even suggest this is the "best" way to officiate. There are many ways to do this.

Agree. When in Rome, switch like the Romans. If the Romans switch on every foul, then switch on every foul. If, on the other hand, the Romans don't make any long switches, then, by all means, don't make any long switches.

Follow the mechanics guidelines described in your local manual, be it written, or oral. An official can never go wrong by following his local mechanics guidelines. Why not do it the proper, local, way? Really. Why not? Proper mechanics is a part of good officiating. Proper switching, that is, the proper, local way, to switch, is a part of good mechanics.

As usual, always listen to bob:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No "long switches" here, and that's by the (our) book. If your book says to do it (and assuming you are expected to follow the book), then switch.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Proper mechanics is a part of good officiating. Proper switching is a part of good mechanics. When I work a game, I have three "official" sets of eyes watching me, my partner, and the two junior varsity officials, who will go home that night and give me a rating. This rating, along with some other criteria (peer rating is 80%), will determine my ranking among my 325 colleagues, which will determine the number of games, as well as the level of the games, that I'm assigned the following season. Mechanics makes up 10% of the "nightly" rating, and proper switching is a part of proper mechanics. So if the "book" says that I'm supposed to switch after every foul, even long switches, then I'm switching after every foul. After thirty-two years, it's automatic for me. Why not do it the proper way? Really. Why not? I'm getting $89.76 to work the game, so why would I try to save a few steps by avoiding a long switch, that, in the long run, could cost me a few assignments next year? Why?

The proper way is always subjective and always will be subjective. And in my 17 years many things have changed. So it cannot be just the same way for you even in 32 years. `And what is the proper way anyway? We do not use NF Mechanics here. We use many things that we have had higher ups feel are important. And again I work in a lot of places and no one has said to me, "You did not switch properly on that call, I will not use you anymore." Maybe when they do then I might worry, but we all come to the table (at least here) from different experiences. Many work college, JH or even wreak ball and all have different goals. Yes we can teach a certain way, but that does not mean everyone is going to do it that way. There is not an official I know that does everything "perfect." But with that being said no one really makes that big of a deal out of long switching. It is screwed up all the time or not followed and no one of significance says anything.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

In my 17 years many things have changed. So it cannot be just the same way for you even in 32 years.

Post #13:

Originally Posted by BillyMac

A few years ago, Connecticut experimented with no long switches when a foul was called in the backcourt, and there was no change in possession ... we went back to switching all the time two years ago.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And what is the proper way anyway? We do not use NF Mechanics here. We use many things that we have had higher ups feel are important.

Post # 34:

Originally Posted by BillyMac

When in Rome, switch like the Romans. If the Romans switch on every foul, then switch on every foul. If, on the other hand, the Romans don't make any long switches, then, by all means, don't make any long switches. Follow the mechanics guidelines described in your local manual, be it written, or oral. An official can never go wrong by following his local mechanics guidelines.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

We can teach a certain way, but that does not mean everyone is going to do it that way.

Post #13:

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Some of our guys either didn't understand "change in possession", didn't understand "backcourt", or were just lazy ... One example of a "confusing" situation for some was the classic player control charge foul in the frontcourt called by the lead. Another was an offensive "over the back" call before the defensive player gained control of a rebound, called by the trail.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The proper way is always subjective and always will be subjective.

If that's the way it's done in northeastern Illinois, then that's fine. It obviously works for you guys. Great.

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, it's not at all subjective. It's pretty cut and dry. For all of our board assignments, we switch on every foul. Period. It's in the IAABO mechanics manual. We teach our "cadets" that way. We expect all 325 of our officials to do it that way.

As we often say here on the Forum, "When in Rome ...".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

There is not an official I know that does everything "perfect."

I don't know of any either. We have many officials who do almost everything perfectly. We also have officials who don't even come close to doing anything perfectly. Like every local board, or association, on the planet, we have officials that lie everywhere on the "perfection spectrum". We're all human. We're not "Robo-Officials".

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If that's the way it's done in northeastern Illinois, then that's fine. It obviously works for you guys. Great.

Here in my little corner of Connecticut, it's not at all subjective. It's pretty cut and dry. For all of our board assignments, we switch on every foul. Period. It's in the IAABO mechanics manual. We teach our "cadets" that way. We expect all 325 of our officials to do it that way.

As we often say here on the Forum, "When in Rome ...".

It is subjective all over the country and that is obvious if you read this site as any indication.

And no one calls this place, Northeastern Illinois here unless you are not from here.

BTW, this is a state issue, not something just in one part of the state. Our local officials associations do not assign games, they only train. The State is responsible for all the mechanics and procedural standards throughout the state.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

And no one calls this place, Northeastern Illinois here unless you are not from here.

OK. I'll bite. Since I've never had the pleasure of visiting that part of the country, what do the natives call Northeastern Illinois?

[canuckrefguy]

FIBA makes it simple. When you call a foul in 2-person - except the 'special' ones - you become the new trail. Not that we don't 'massage' the mechanics a bit during mens rec ball

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Rich

Let's say I buy what you're selling: Why don't we switch then on shooting fouls where the trail makes the call?

We switch often enough. No reason to do so on long switches and on switches where things feel forced. Leave it up to the crew to decide which switches make sense and which ones don't.

Here we do switch if the trail makes the call and we stay in the half court. If it is a shooting foul we don't switch.

[mj]

I prefer to go by the book as it's one less thing to pre-game. There is one thing I don't do by the book and that is pass off a 5th foul to the non-calling official in 2-person and have them tell the coach, get the substitute and tell the player. That is an idiotic mechanic imo.