Rule question

[johnny d]

Originally Posted by #olderthanilook

What if.....

there isn't a defensive team captain on the floor to request the "match game" moment?

then you give whoever asked for one a technical foul for unauthorized speaking to an official

Originally Posted by johnny d

then you give whoever asked for one a technical foul for unauthorized speaking to an official

I know this is a rule, but how often is this enforced? I have players ask me what the foul call was (politely) or how many shots we have and I don't think twice. Assuming no unsportsmanlike conduct or disrespect towards an official, has anyone ever T'd a non-captain player for speaking to the you?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

I know this is a rule, but how often is this enforced?I have players ask me what the foul call was (politely) or how many shots we have and I don't think twice. Assuming no unsportsmanlike conduct or disrespect towards an official, has anyone ever T'd a non-captain player for speaking to the you?

Why would you? How would you? Based on what rule?

Originally Posted by just another ref

Why would you? How would you? Based on what rule?

Ah, I see now johnny d was joking. My fault.

Rant: Being new and reading a lot of the old threads to glean information, I realize that the communication on this board is rather unclear. A big part of our job as officials is to clearly and effectively communicate. Sarcasm and jokes are funny, but as we all know, text has an acute inability to communicate tone and inference. I suggest that we all try to be more clear in our writing, which I think would solve some of the communication problems I have noticed. Thoughts?

[APG]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

Ah, I see now johnny d was joking. My fault.

Rant: Being new and reading a lot of the old threads to glean information, I realize that the communication on this board is rather unclear. A big part of our job as officials is to clearly and effectively communicate. Sarcasm and jokes are funny, but as we all know, text has an acute inability to communicate tone and inference. I suggest that we all try to be more clear in our writing, which I think would solve some of the communication problems I have noticed. Thoughts?

Pretty sure the use of the emoticion was a clear giveaway that he wasn't being serious but nonetheless...when you have posters who have interacted with each other for close to 10+ years, there tends to be a certain ebb and flow...which includes inside jokes, humor, sarcasm, and sometimes brevity which if you're on the boards long enough, you tend to pick up on. Sometimes that means things won't be spelled out explicitly every single time which may make things unclear for a new official or someone who doesn't frequent the boards.

My suggestion, if you have a question, ask it. Especially, as a new official, that should give those answering your question the proper mindset in answering your question (including being more explicit).

Originally Posted by APG

My suggestion, if you have a question, ask it. Especially, as a new official, that should give those answering your question the proper mindset in answering your question (including being more explicit).

Sounds good, thanks!

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by seanwestref

Ah, I see now johnny d was joking. My fault.

Rant: Being new and reading a lot of the old threads to glean information, I realize that the communication on this board is rather unclear. A big part of our job as officials is to clearly and effectively communicate. Sarcasm and jokes are funny, but as we all know, text has an acute inability to communicate tone and inference. I suggest that we all try to be more clear in our writing, which I think would solve some of the communication problems I have noticed. Thoughts?

Ha!. Good one. For a moment, I thought you were being serious, but then I caught your tone.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Ha!. Good one. For a moment, I thought you were being serious, but then I caught your tone.

Right. It wasn't in blue font.

Since this thread started with my question, I'll ask a few more.

Regarding 3-seconds in the lane. Is there anything that causes a 3-second count to restart, similarly to how a closely guarded count is terminated? If player A1 goes into the paint for a shot, misses, and keeps putting up the rebound (and missing) for the next four seconds, what happens? Do I call the 3 seconds or is the count terminated upon a shot attempt?

As the trail, does it matter which arm I use for the 10-second count? I typically use the inside arm, but I watched a few varsity games on tv this week and all the officials used the outside arm.