Pointing Mechanic

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by TriggerMN

I've been told at camps that the point is a signal to the shot clock operator that possession has changed and the shot clock should be reset.

To the extent that's true, it should be used then only when there's a question about it, not on an obvious reset.

For example, A has posession, loose ball, B bats it / grabs it and throws it, a recovers.

And, there is a signal for that already, and that's not the one they use.

[j51969]

How many people at a HS basketball game are going to be able to pick out these kinds of details on a jacket? Outside the officiating crew maybe 1 other guy. Who cares what kind of jacket he or she wears for 15min? Hell I don't even care about a screwy mechanic as long as we are on the same page, and it is conveying information that is valuable. What I do care about is someone who is fit, knowledgeable, and professional. I am 100% Soldier and a NCO in the United States Army. I am all for maintaining and upholding standards (it's what I do). How about the first guy with a smitty, the first pair of beltless pants, the first pair of patent leather shoes, or the pleated pant. I bet all of these guys were big leaguers at one time too. Every mentor you see preaches looking like the guy in the back of the book...a robot. Great advice really, and then you see them work. Awesome officials, but all seem to have something they do that isn't quite mechanically sound. Have some perspective....I can't believe so much venom is being spewed over something so minor. Your hang up with the CCA jacket pointing guy has to go deeper than the acts themselves.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by j51969

How many people at a HS basketball game are going to be able to pick out these kinds of details on a jacket? Outside the officiating crew maybe 1 other guy. Who cares what kind of jacket he or she wears for 15min?

Well if it is a jacket the organization that authorizes its use does not want it to be worn, then more than 1 official might just notice. I know I would notice as I work college and I never wear that jacket in a HS game and never would. And all it takes is for the right person to see it like and evaluator, a state representative or the assignor and that is all they need. And with games being online, media or some camera phone, that is all it takes. So yes it can matter.

Originally Posted by j51969

Hell I don't even care about a screwy mechanic as long as we are on the same page, and it is conveying information that is valuable. What I do care about is someone who is fit, knowledgeable, and professional. I am 100% Soldier and a NCO in the United States Army. I am all for maintaining and upholding standards (it's what I do). How about the first guy with a smitty, the first pair of beltless pants, the first pair of patent leather shoes, or the pleated pant. I bet all of these guys were big leaguers at one time too. Every mentor you see preaches looking like the guy in the back of the book...a robot. Great advice really, and then you see them work. Awesome officials, but all seem to have something they do that isn't quite mechanically sound. Have some perspective....I can't believe so much venom is being spewed over something so minor. Your hang up with the CCA jacket pointing guy has to go deeper than the acts themselves.

Actually this is a bad comparison on many levels. Shirt with a smitty or pleated pants were not something unique to college or other levels. Heck there were already belt-less pants and pleated were more comfortable and no one cared or noticed if you wore them when they first became popular. Just like no one cared if you wore a V-neck shirt when those came in style. Apples and Star fruit if you ask me.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by j51969

How many people at a HS basketball game are going to be able to pick out these kinds of details on a jacket?

Anyone who matters will be able to pick it out and once they do (in many areas) it's too late.

Depending on the area, the same can be said for people who wear belted pants or side panel shirts.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

... the same can be said for people who wear belted pants.

I’ll give up my black belt when you take it from my cold, dead, waist.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I’ll give up my black belt when you take it from my cold, dead, waist.

I still think the saddest thing is that you continue to reference it as a point of (misplaced, IMO) pride.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rich

I still think the saddest thing is that you continue to reference it as a point of (misplaced, IMO) pride.

It's not a point of pride for me personally, it's about comfort, familiarity, and belonging to a local board that is flexible in some uniform issues. Maybe it is a point of pride that I belong to a local board that allows some flexibility in it's dress guidelines, my local board realizing that, although a proper uniform is an important part of officiating, it's not necessarily just the clothes that make the official.

Over thirty two years I've seen officials move up the ladder with, and without belts, so I figured, why change. Many of our top officials, the ones that work the state championship games, still wear belted pants, especially the more "mature" officials. Our flexible dress guidelines allow me this choice.

Officials on my local board are allowed to wear either pleated pants, or flat pants. I have both, I don't have a preference, and the next pair that I purchase will be either pleated, or flat, whatever is easily available, most comfortable, and less expensive. Our flexible dress guidelines allow me this choice.

Several years ago, many officials on my local board started to use the Smitty lanyard, so I gave it a shot for a few games, but kept pulling on it, a bad habit from many, many, years of using a noose lanyard, and broke a few jersey loops, so I decided to go back, for good, to the noose lanyard, and not the one that hitches up to your neck, the old fashioned one that is "loose" all the way down to the whistle. Our flexible dress guidelines allow me this choice.

Many years ago, we were forced to switch from the pea whistle, I think that it was a Acme Thunderer, to the Fox 40. I didn't like the larger size of the Fox 40 so I switched to the Mini Fox, that was similar in size to the Acme Thunderer. After several games, I had a few partners, and observers, tell me that my whistle wasn't loud enough, so I went the Fox 40, and eventually got used to it, so you can teach an old dog new tricks.

I'm not a very flashy dresser, so I've tried to stay away from patent leather shoes. I'm getting to an age when I have to really start trying to take care of my feet, and everyone on my local board, as well as many on the Forum, have been raving about the Reebok Zigs, "they're light", "they're comfortable", etc. I finally relented and bought a pair of patent leather Zigs. I've only worn them once and the comfort more than balances out the flashy appearance of the patent leather, so it looks like I can live, and work, with shiny shoes.

I firmly believe that an official should be appropriately dressed, but there's more to a good official than unbelted, pleated pants, Smitty lanyards, Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes. I also realize that flexibility in an official's uniform is not possible in many local associations, but it is in mine, and I'm lucky that I can take advantage of the flexibility in our local dress code (comfort, familiarity, availability, cost), where many of you are not so fortunate. If I were on a local board with less flexible dress guidelines, then I, like many of you, would be wearing unbelted, pleated pants, Smitty lanyards, with Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes.

Once again, as we've heard so many times on the Forum, "When in Rome ...".

And finally, there is another reason why I keep referencing my black belted pants, because some Forum members keep making fun of those officials, like me, both Forum members, and non Forum members that they've observed, that wear belted pants, so I always respond: I wear them because I like them, and I can, and if you think that it makes me a lesser official, then you're dead wrong.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's not a point of pride for me personally, it's about comfort, familiarity, and belonging to a local board that is flexible in some uniform issues. Maybe it is a point of pride that I belong to a local board that allows some flexibility in it's dress guidelines, my local board realizing that, although a proper uniform is an important part of officiating, it's not necessarily just "the clothes that make the (official)".

Over thirty two years I've seen officials move up the ladder with, and without belts, so I figured, why change. Many of our top officials, the ones that work the state championship games, still wear belted slacks, especially the more "mature" officials.

Well that might be correct and what you observe, but I do not recall most of of here ever suggesting that someone automatically would not move up because of them wearing a belt. But wearing a belt or any number of uniform items will make you stand out. It might not be in a positive way, but you will stand out. No one one the court is wearing a belt, so why would the officials wear one? It looks silly for that sport and when no one from the top to the bottom as a rule wears one, then why wear one. That is what a tailor is for to make them fit you perfectly if needed. People in my areas stopped wearing belts because of how bad they looked when you were the only one wearing them. I do not think it had anything directly to do with moving up or not moving up.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Several years ago, many officials on my local board started to use the Smitty lanyard, so I gave it a shot for a few games, but kept pulling on it, a bad habit from many, many, years of using a noose lanyard, and broke a few jersey loops, so I decided to go back, for good, to the noose lanyard, and not the one that hitches up to your neck, the old fashioned one that is "loose" all the way down to the whistle.

False equivalence, I have never heard or seen anyone care what kind of lanyard someone wears. I haven't warn a Smitty lanyard in years and cannot think that anyone even noticed.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Many years ago, we were forced to switch from the pea whistle, I think that it was a Acme Thunderer, to the Fox 40. I didn't like the larger size of the Fox 40 so I switched to the Mini Fox. After several games, I had a few partners, and observers, tell me that my whistle wasn't loud enough, so I went the Fox 40, and eventually got used to it, so you can teach an old dog new tricks.

Another false argument when the only issue with a whistle was sound. I worked with a guy that used a Fox Mini and I never heard him when the crowd got very loud. Who cares about style of your whistle if it makes enough noise to be heard when you need to be heard.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm not a flashy dresser, so I've tried to stay away from patent leather shoes. I'm getting to an age when I have to really start trying to take care of my feet, and everyone on my local board, as well as many on the Forum, have been raving about the Reebok Zigs, "they're light", "they're comfortable", etc. I finally relented and bought a pair of patent leather Zigs. I've only worn them once and the comfort more than balances out the flashy appearance of the patent leather, so it looks like I can live with shiny shoes.

People did not buy the shoes to be flashy. People bought the shoes because they were comfortable, period. That is why in several situations this year me and my partners were all in the Zigs because we all independently liked the shoe. No other reason. Honestly if I could have found a pair without the patented leather design I would have. And the shoes before that I had patented leather were comfortable too. I have never bought a shoe and only liked them because of how they look. They have to be comfortable first. I bought some Reebox years ago that were patented leather and I wore them twice. They are still sitting in my closet and I would never wear them again.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There's another reason that I occasionally post about my conservative dress. I firmly believe that an official should be appropriately dressed, but there's more to a good official than unbelted slacks, Smitty lanyards, Fox 40 whistles, and shiny shoes. I also realize that flexibility in an official's uniform is not possible in many local associations, but it is in mine, and I'm lucky that I can take advantage of the flexibility in our local dress code, where many of you are not so fortunate. If I were on a local board with less flexible dress guidelines, then I, like many of you, would be wearing unbelted slacks, Smitty lanyards, and shiny shoes.

Once again, as we've heard so many times on the Forum, "When in Rome ...".

Again, I do not believe that anyone has said "you must wear this or else." Most of these discussions or items you have brought up have been about personal preferences, even with pants styles. I think the western flat front pants look bad, but that does not stop anyone from wearing them or working big games because of them. Actually all these things you talk about are minor if you can officiate, but most people have no problem changing. You are not the only one that started wearing one kind of uniform and as time changed we changed or move to something else. We all know that some things might be local and certain areas might have some preferences, but I have never heard anyone say you will not work a single game because you have (fill in the blank) item. My associations have absolutely no say over what we wear because they do not hire us to do anything and hire people outside of association affiliations in the vast majority of cases for HS games, but you will be judged as an individual and if you look a certain way for all kinds of reasons, that is what is going to hold you back, not one item in your uniform.

Peace

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It's not a point of pride for me personally, it's about comfort, familiarity, and belonging to a local board that is flexible in some uniform issues. Maybe it is a point of pride that I belong to a local board that allows some flexibility in it's dress guidelines, my local board realizing that, although a proper uniform is an important part of officiating, it's not necessarily just the clothes that make the official.

....

And finally, there is another reason why I keep referencing my black belted pants, because some Forum members keep making fun of those officials, like me, both Forum members, and non Forum members that they've observed, that wear belted pants, so I always respond: I wear them because I like them, and I can, and if you think that it makes me a lesser official, then you're dead wrong.

I've never, ever seen a guy wear a belt in a serious game in any place I've lived since the early 1990s who was a top flight official. There are a few guys here locally who are politically connected that wear belts, but an independent evaluation of their work on the court would show a difference between what those guys get in the postseason compared with their actual ability. One of those guys stubbornly wears the belted pants and then matches it with an Acme Thunderer rubber-tipped metal pea whistle and always lets everyone know he's "using the pea whistle." No clue what HE'S trying to prove, but he's the kind of guy I hope I'm never paired with.

When someone has the choice of wearing something that 100% of the officials who work at the top levels wear (on TV and elsewhere) and it's actually the standard wear for the sport, I just don't understand why you'd make a different choice.

I started working HS ball in 1987. No idea what I was wearing back then with my Byron collar. I know I've been wearing beltless pants since at least the early 90s, though, and maybe earlier. The only change has been the addition of pleats between then and now. I feel the same way about flat front pants today as I feel about belts -- why would an official buy flat fronts when all the top officials wear pleats and they've become the standard.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

I still think the saddest thing is that you continue to reference it as a point of (misplaced, IMO) pride.

And this surprises you?

Peace