NFHS June 6, 2013 Release ...

[Camron Rust]

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.

That is fundamentally stupid. The offense doesn't deserve the extra help because they are the ones that lost control of the ball...probably through a bad pass. We're supposed to judge the legality of the players' actions, not help them in their actions.

Are we to give the tip when the ball is heading OOB so one team or the other can know they don't have to save the ball?

Are we also going to yell out when the ball handler is getting close to a boundary line so they don't step OOB???

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That is fundamentally stupid. The offense doesn't deserved the extra help because they are the ones that lost control of the ball...probably through a bad pass.

Are we to give the tip when the ball is heading OOB so one team or the other know they don't have to save the ball?

Are we also going to yell out when the ball handler is getting close to a boundary line so they don't OOB???

I think the signal is really for your partner, not anyone else. Any signal that gives information IMO is not really a bad thing. It is like the kicked signal we used for years and then the NF finally recognized we had to tell people why we called a violation.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think the signal is really for your partner, not anyone else.

Not according to the NFHS: "This signal increases the official's ability to communicate with the players, coaches and fans on critical plays".

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Not according to the NFHS: "This signal increases the official's ability to communicate with the players, coaches and fans on critical plays".

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

[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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

I have never been under the impression that any of the players directly involved in the play even knows what we are signaling or doing. Usually the play happens so fast that if we are going to call a violation there is no time to give this signal in the first place. I have given the signal when I was telling others why I was not calling a violation, but that is rather rare.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have never been under the impression that any of the players directly involved in the play even knows what we are signaling or doing. Usually the play happens so fast that if we are going to call a violation there is no time to give this signal in the first place. I have given the signal when I was telling others why I was not calling a violation, but that is rather rare.

Peace

A player chasing a basketball rarely turns his head to see if the official is giving some kind of signal

[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.

[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.