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

The recent thread on rules regarding the jump ball to start the game has given me an idea for an article for our local board's newsletter. The working title is, "Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game".

I want concentrate on things that officials often, or sometimes, say during a game that do not have any basis in the rules.

Examples may include:

"On the floor" (for fouls against players who are not in the act of shooting).
"Don't move" (before a designated spot throwin).
"Hold your spots" (before the jump ball).
"You can't stand behind him" (before a the jump ball, to a player who is directly behind an opponent, who are both ten feet off the circle).
"Everybody get behind the division line" (during a free throw for a technical, or intentional, foul).
"Let it hit the rim" (before a free throw).
"Over the back" (on a rebounding foul, it's probably a pushing foul).
"Reaching in" (on a foul against a ball handler, it's probably a holding foul, an illegal use of hands foul, or a hand check foul).
"Coach, you have one timeout left" (when, by rule, we should only be notifying head coaches when their team has been granted its final allowable timeout).
"Sit down" (to a coach who has not been charged with a technical foul).
"You have to take out your earrings" (instead of, "You can't play with earrings").

I really don't want to get into a debate regarding whether, or not, we should be saying things like this in a game for the purpose of preventative officiating, I just want those officials who are saying things like this to know that there is no basis in the rules for these statements, with a short explanation of why these statements are incorrect.

Anything to add to the list?

On the floor!

This One Floored Me ...
 

Good one. Thanks. It's added.

I had a game in which two HS players, A1 & B1 went diving after a loose ball. A1 was sliding on his stomach before catching up to the ball and B1 kind of fell on him and was sliding with him on his back. They went only about two feet like this. They came to a stop with B1 laying right on top of A1 as the ball went OOB. I looked down at the two of them and said, quite loudly, "Get a room". They both laughed, as did quite a few other players, but I'm not sure I would recommend this. After all, there isn't anything wrong with that. :rolleyes:

*In this current society of gay/lesbo permissiveness---I guess saying "get a room" to two men [or women] whom inadvertently wound up laying on top of each in pursuit of a "loose ball other could be percieved as either an attempt at "comedy" or a statement of "levity". But what the heck..lol anyway.

*If I could add to your List:

1. After the timeout has expired and the horn has sounded to resume play, some refs shout to the benches "let's play ball" or "break up the huddle".
Is it really part of our job to "usher" the teams back on court by shouting such or blowing our whistle several times to make them resume play?
Lately, I have begun to just stand by the ball at the point of inbounding and slowly and dramatically starting a 5-second count. Usually a player sees this and runs out to inbound it.
So, that's what I add to your List: "Refs should not be ushering the play to resume when there are horns and assistant coaches to fulfill this function--it's not our job", correct?

From the manual ...
 

From the manual:

D. Resuming Play:
1. At the warning signal (first horn) for all time-outs, and the intermissions
between the first and second and third and fourth quarters, the
officials will step toward the nearest team huddle and notify the coaches/
bench by raising an index finger and saying "first horn."

We have a right to tell them what to do as we can use the RPP if they are not ready. So I do not find this even an issue if said word for word as you stated. Understand the reasoning for this list is that these things are usually incorrect or not supported by rule. Part of our job (at least in my experience) is to get them out of the huddle and if they don't, we use the procedures in place. It is called preventative officiating IMO.

Peace

I disagree with you that these have no rules basis or that they cannot be used. We are not giving rules clinics. We have every right to convey a message even if that message is somewhat incomplete. It is the player's and coach's job to know the rules we are talking to them about. If they do not understand the nuance, shame on them.

Peace

Well this thread began with the author's benign and well-intentioned attempt to "dispel" some misconceptions of officiating that ostensibly were either unsupported by formal nfhs doctrine or had beomce so ingrained in officiating parlance that the author thought they ought be addressed--at least in a cursory manner via this forum. But inevitably, as seems to be the pattern amongst the writers on this forum, this issue is morphing into another esoteric debate.
For the record, it's clear to me that all of the points that were said "should not be done" will continue to be frequently done--not because of malevolent intent or ignorance--but rather because they are simply not worth changing. Thus, we can make a list of 99 such items, but they will continue to be practiced.

No one term is going to sentence is going to convey every rule or every facet of a rule. That is why I take issue with why some of these things cannot be said in the first place. We tell players and coaches what they need to know to apply the rule. That is different from saying "On the floor" when we are conveying why we made a call. Telling a player "You cannot move" on a designated throw-in only tells them what they often expect they can do. I get asked often on a throw-in by a player, "Can I move?" I think we are often telling them what they think they can or cannot do and preventing a silly violation. I do not think it is that big of a deal.

Peace

Wrong.

Wrong again.

Read more, post less for now.

+1

Some of us do what we're expected to do in our areas. All I know is that jumping straight to strict implementation of the RPP could be considered a career-limiting move in many areas.

I do it, but I find this to be, for the most part, useless.