NFHS June 6, 2013 Release ...

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Wouldn't they have to only roll one sock down?

The rule applies to each item of clothing. Since most socks have two logos both have to be rolled down. That's why those Nike Elite basketball socks started popping up. If you notice, each sock only has one logo so they're legal in the NCAA.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

The rule applies to each item of clothing.

So a single pair of socks is considered to be two items of clothing. Interesting. Sometimes it's good to be just a high school official.

JetMetFan: FYI, spell check changes "JetMetFan" to "Comedian". Also interesting.

[Multiple Sports]

You have 50% of the posts on this site....

Kinda like missing a lay up 5 times to pad your rebound your stats.....And then making the 6th shot....

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Kinda like missing a lay up 5 times to pad your rebound your stats.....And then making the 6th shot....

Yeah, but it messes up your shooting percentage!

[Multiple Sports]

BM's percentages of good posts is pretty low.......

He is a subscriber to quantity over quality.....

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So a single pair of socks is considered to be two items of clothing. Interesting. Sometimes it's good to be just a high school official.

JetMetFan: FYI, spell check changes "JetMetFan" to "Comedian". Also interesting.

With the teams I support I have to laugh to avoid crying.

This is the least-enforced of the fashion police rules I can think of. My supervisor reminds us to remind the teams again in February, especially those that might advance to the NCAAs. That way they don't get any surprises in March.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I know what they said, but that is not the real benefit of the signal and not the reason officials used the signal in the first place. Officials were using this signal long before the NF approved it.

Peace

That may be the way you're using it but they're pretty much telling us to help the players play.

The kick signal you referred to above was used after the whistle to communicate what the call was. It was not an aide to the player while the ball was still in play.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BillyMac
2013-14 BASKETBALL RULES CHANGES

TIP SIGNAL: This signal increases the official's ability to communicate with the players, coaches and fans on critical plays. Immediately communicating whether or not the defense tipped the ball allows the offensive team to immediately know whether or not they can recover the ball without penalty. Having no signal actually gives the defense an unfair advantage as they do not need to know which team caused the ball to enter the backcourt, they can recover the ball without penalty regardless.

Why should that matter to the offense? They still need to be the first to recover the ball to prevent an easy score by the opponent regardless of whether the ball was tipped or not.

[just another ref]

How does a tip signal help the offense? As stated above, if the ball is loose in the backcourt, the offense will try to go and get it whether it is a violation or not. The main value I see is to keep some partners I could name from calling a violation right in front of me from 60 feet away. It might also keep the 3 knowledgeable fans in the house from yelling for a violation. The other 300 will yell for it anyway.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Why should that matter to the offense? They still need to be the first to recover the ball to prevent an easy score by the opponent regardless of whether the ball was tipped or not.

Originally Posted by just another ref

How does a tip signal help the offense? As stated above, if the ball is loose in the backcourt, the offense will try to go and get it whether it is a violation or not. The main value I see is to keep some partners I could name from calling a violation right in front of me from 60 feet away. It might also keep the 3 knowledgeable fans in the house from yelling for a violation. The other 300 will yell for it anyway.

The offense can choose to get it immediately or to get into a position to either defend if the can or perhaps let the opponent touch it first then try to get it.

I think the signal should NOT be immediate but only upon someone touching it if it wasn't obvious. Any moment before that and we're influencing the actual play.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The offense can choose to get it immediately or to get into a position to either defend if they can......

Getting it immediately gives the offense the opportunity to get all players back to defend. I've never seen a player ignore a chance to touch the ball to hurry back to a defensive position instead.

.......or perhaps let the opponent touch it first then try to get it.

Not gonna say it never happens, but this is a really bad idea.

I think the signal should NOT be immediate but only upon someone touching it if it wasn't obvious.

In my experience this is the way the signal is used, and probably will continue to be.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Getting it immediately gives the offense the opportunity to get all players back to defend. I've never seen a player ignore a chance to touch the ball to hurry back to a defensive position instead.

I have. I've seen players hover over the ball as it rolled towards the backcourt endline. Only when a defender approached did they grab it. They thought they had touched it last and expected a violation but I'm guessing they wanted to let the clock run just a bit longer. If I were to indicate tip, that would be a signal to them that it was safe to pick up the ball. Is that really fair? Shouldn't they have to play based on what they see and hear instead of looking to us for information?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I've seen players hover over the ball as it rolled towards the backcourt endline.

Me too, in little kid's games. They know that it's wrong to touch the ball first, so they hover, waiting for an opportunity to scoop up the ball after it's been touched by an opponent. I've seen this dozens of times, as a young player, a middle school coach, and an official, and I've never, ever, seen it work.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I've never, ever, seen it work.

Me neither.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The offense can choose to get it immediately or to get into a position to either defend if they can or perhaps let the opponent touch it first then try to get it.

I think the signal should NOT be immediate but only upon someone touching it if it wasn't obvious. Any moment before that and we're influencing the actual play.

Most likely the O-player will make that decision based on who he thinks has the best possibility to get to the ball and not on our signal/no signal (which he may not even notice anyway.) I'm not totally opposed to the mechanic, I just think the rationale is weak and, that it might encourage some officials to expand its use to other situations (such as blocked shots) which we have always discouraged.