Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by johnny d

I use spot throw-in rather than don't move.

Sounds like you agree with me, otherwise you would say, "Don't move". After all, according to some Forum members, both statements mean the same thing, with, "Spot throw-in", being much too complex for player's brain to handle without the official conducting an "on the spot" rules clinic (pun intended).

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

So what is the difference in what you are telling them? Does a player stay their like a statue? Do they know what spot they have? Do they know what that meanps? Seriously, what are they getting out of your words they think they cannot do?

Peace

It tells thyem they can't run the endline. It's accurate rule terminology.

Use what you want, obviously it's working well enough for you.

It's just like 'on the floor' IMO, in that the vast majority of the time it gets the right message across, but it's incorrect and potentially exacerbates already problematic rule myths.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rooster

How about "You've got 36 inches (or 3 feet) wide and all the way back"?

Rooster: Without a smilie, I can't tell if your serious, or trying to be funny, or sarcastic, or what? In any case, I don't like your idea. This sounds like the rules clinic that JRutledge is trying to avoid, and something that, I think, JRutledge, and I, can agree upon 100%.

Plus, only one foot has to remain over the thirty-six inch area, there is actually quite a bit of movement allowed on a designated spot throwin. Get out your tape measure and give it a try.

[BillyMac]

Now let's discuss baseline, and endline. I think that the fire needs more gasoline.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You used the example of telling players to go to half court, but I have never told any player to go to half court ...

But others have. Please don't tempt me to start a poll asking if any Forum member has ever observed, or worked with, or heard about, an official who directed players to go behind the division line.

[Rooster]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Rooster: Without a smilie, I can't tell if your serious, or trying to be funny, or sarcastic, or what? In any case, I hate your idea. This sounds like the rules clinic that JRutledge is trying to avoid, and something that, I think, JRutledge, and I, can agree upon 100%.

Plus, only one foot has to remain over the thirty-six inch "spot", there is actually quite a bit of movement allowed on a designated spot throwin. Get out your tape measure and give it a try.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Eitehr way it goes, I am still saying, "Don't move." I think it makes little difference and nothing I have heard changes my mind or seems relevent to what a player thinks they can or cannot do.

Peace

Not trying to be funny or sarcastic. JRutledge said he hadn't heard anything that he would use instead of "Don't move." I was trying to come up with something that can be communicated quickly, that is factually correct, and lets a thrower know what he/she CAN do.

I don't see this as a rules clinic, but that's me.

I do know that "only one foot has to remain over the thirty-six inch "spot", there is actually quite a bit of movement allowed on a designated spot throw-in." See post #88

Hate is a strong word, doncha think?

I thinks that's enough smilies for now...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Rooster

Hate is a strong word, doncha think?

Yes I do. I apologize. I fixed it. Ask anybody on the Forum, I may post some pretty stupid things, but I always, and I mean always, try to be polite. Sorry. Please don't tell my Mom. She would be very disappointed in me, and in our Irish Catholic family, we're really good about making family members feel guilty, and she's better at it than anybody else in the family. She's what you would call a "Guilt Expert".

[JeffM]

I understand that saying "on the floor" is considered unacceptable so I stopped saying it.

However, I think it quickly conveys the essential information that the foul was before the shot.

So, I have said "spot" or "designated spot" instead. However, many players don't seem to understand what that means and I've been asked by players if it was a shooting foul.

I've also used "white ball" which seems to works better.

So, what is the best way to say it? I don't think that "before the shot" would be any more acceptable than "on the floor".

[just another ref]

Just wondering, with regard to instructions or lack thereof, the only time I say anything is when the throw-in is on the endline after a timeout. Is this the case for others?


"on the spot" while pointing at the spot


or



"you can move" accompanied by the sweeping gesture up and down the line

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by JeffM

I understand that saying "on the floor" is considered unacceptable so I stopped saying it.

However, I think it quickly conveys the essential information that the foul was before the shot.

So, I have said "spot" or "designated spot" instead. However, many players don't seem to understand what that means and I've been asked by players if it was a shooting foul.

I've also used "white ball" which seems to works better.

So, what is the best way to say it? I don't think that "before the shot" would be any more acceptable than "on the floor".

I personally have no problem with "on the floor." Everybody knows what it means, even if they don't know why it means what it means.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JeffM

I understand that saying "on the floor" is considered unacceptable so I stopped saying it.

However, I think it quickly conveys the essential information that the foul was before the shot.

So, I have said "spot" or "designated spot" instead. However, many players don't seem to understand what that means and I've been asked by players if it was a shooting foul.

I've also used "white ball" which seems to works better.

So, what is the best way to say it? I don't think that "before the shot" would be any more acceptable than "on the floor".

Like I noted, the vast majority of the time, people get the intended meaning. However, simply saying "before the shot" when required gets the same point across without conveying the idea that if the shooter was on the floor when he was fouled he won't get free throws. And yes, I get that question a lot from coaches and players.

"Wasn't he on the floor?"

"Yes, but he had started his shot."

At best, this ends with a blank stare. At worst, it ends with a snarky comment from the referee. Somewhere in the middle of those, it ends with a technical foul.

[APG]

Originally Posted by JeffM

I understand that saying "on the floor" is considered unacceptable so I stopped saying it.

However, I think it quickly conveys the essential information that the foul was before the shot.

So, I have said "spot" or "designated spot" instead. However, many players don't seem to understand what that means and I've been asked by players if it was a shooting foul.

I've also used "white ball" which seems to works better.

So, what is the best way to say it? I don't think that "before the shot" would be any more acceptable than "on the floor".

A simple no shot (use the wave off if need be). Follow that with the team and where the throw-in will be if you feel like it.

Originally Posted by just another ref

I personally have no problem with "on the floor." Everybody knows what it means, even if they don't know why it means what it means.

Everyone knows what "over the back" means but we still don't want officials reporting fouls as "over the back" or even have it in their lexicon.

I can also say that in my experience, officials that use "on the floor" are generally poor at applying continuous motion, and I wouldn't doubt that using this phrase somehow influences their thinking in that a player on the floor isn't in the act.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Now let's look at some facts, not opinions, but cold facts.

Fact #1: Despite that fact that we agree that, "Don't move", seems to be the quickest, and the best, statement that most efficiently communicates needed information to a player, and to a coach, without holding a rules clinic, it does not match the rules in the rulebook. There are there scenarios where a designated spot inbounder can legally move, within the designated area, a step, either side, outside the designated area, and as far back as can be accomplished in five seconds. These are facts, not opinions.

I do not think it is a requirement to use every term that the rulebook uses to communicate to people that do not know the rulebook language. Yes, we should you rulebook language as a standard, but there are times when it will not always convey the proper message without having an elongated discussion with a player or coach. And when they ask, "Can I move?" they certainly are not using rulebook language and I do not have the energy to try to make sure they understand what that means in the rulebook. Just like when a coach ask me on a block charge call, "Was he set", I might tell them "yes" and move on.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Fact #2: At least two officials on this Forum, Camron Rust, and BillyMac, have dealt with coaches who took the directive, "Don't move", literally, and were charged with technical fouls for unsporting complaining about opponent players who "moved" on a spot throw in because he was sure they couldn't "move". These are facts, not opinions.

Neither of you live in my state. Neither of you are an assignor I work for. Neither of you are the Head Clinician. So it is nice that this is part of your experience, but it is certainly not my experience or any experience I have heard of until this very discussion. So obviously what I have been doing for years (and not what I say every time BTW) has never been a problem to the point where I had to give a T for what I said. And I have never had an argument over the issue as well. I will certainly be more aware, but I doubt it is going to change anything I will say or not say. I do sometimes say "spot" but it depends on what has happened in the game or who I am speaking to. Sometimes, "Don't move" solves the problem.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Now that I have validated, and accepted, for sake of argument, that your opinion that, "Don't move", does not belong on a list of "Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game", can you, JRutledge, at least, give me the courtesy of answering the following two questions?

1) Do you dispute that Fact #1 (above) is, indeed, factual?

2) Do you dispute that Fact #2 (above) is, indeed, factual?

I never said a thrower could not move under the rules under and circumstances. But you keep acting like because you say they cannot move they are taking you so literally that they actually believe they cannot move literally. I have never seen a thrower think that their feet or body was in stone as a result of what we tell them. Obviously they move if they can move their arms, which is usually required in order to throw the ball onto the court. Stop being ridiculous to try to make some point no one is making in this situation. No one is taking us that literally in anything we tell them irregardless of what you are tying to state on this site. And in #2 it is a fact that many more officials do not wear a belt on the court, but you do. You have been ridiculed by some here for that very reason and you keep wearing a belt proudly. Does that fact change what you do or what you wear? Nope, so why would this be so compelling that two people that live in a completely different place and one of you never works 3 Person for varsity and does not work playoffs (your admission) be so compelling of an argument? And one person that said it was not a big deal actually lives in my state. That to me would be a much more compelling argument to keep doing what I have been doing if you ask me.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What if the list were named: "Things That Officials Say In A Game That Are Not Factually Consistent With The Rules Of The Game Of Basketball, But They Say Them Anyway Because It's The Most Efficient Way To Communicate With Players, and Coaches"?

If you want to come up with any list that is your right. But just like most lists people will disagree with the content or the order. Every watched the NFL Network and the Top 10 list shows. People disagree with the content all the time. This will be no different.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

But others have. Please don't tempt me to start a poll asking if any Forum member has ever observed, or worked with, or heard about, an official who directed players to go behind the division line.

Well good for them. I cannot recall the last time someone told them they had to and that is where the players magically go. The only time this becomes even a remote issue is when a coach wants to talk to a player and it has been only a couple of times I can remember an official not allowing that interaction because they were not at half court (on the side of where the T FTs were taking place). Do not confuse what a few people say on this site and equate it to most officials do on a regular basis in their careers or games they work.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If you tell them spot, that should tell them it is a spot throw-in and they cannot run the line. What they don't know after that is not our concern.

I agree this is splitting hairs.

Well isn't "spot" not a complete description of the rule? After all it is a "Designated Spot" not a "Spot" throw-in. And if you tell them spot, do they know what that means?

That is why it is spitting hairs because when you tell them "Don't move" they know they do not have the ability to "run." I consider most of this considerably shallow and silly. And I would not care either way if it works for someone to communicate to a player or coach.

Peace