![]() |
I went to two ref camps this summer. At the first camp they told us to practice in front of the microwave at home to get our 5 and 10 second counts correct.....an evaulator at the second ref camp asked me "what the hell was I was doing counting so fast?".
Second camp evaluator told me to count "one-thousand and one", etc. which usually works out to be about 7 or 8 seconds on the 5 second count and about 15 seconds on a 10 second count. Help. |
I think most people are surprised at how quickly you count if you are counting by the clock. We had a guy in our association that I watched and thought he counted way too quickly, until I watched the clock in conjunction with his count....I personally try to match the clock, and make it a strong 5 or 10 second count (5+ 10+) just to make sure...if you get counting slow or fast and a coach is watching the clock, there will be trouble...
|
I've also tried counting along with the timer on the treadmill and eliptical at the gym. Looks a little strange, but who cares? :D
|
My visual count for 5 (Closely guarded) usually starts at "Two".
My visual count for an administered throw-in will start at "One" My visual count for 10 usually starts at "Five". mick <HR> Like Lawrence Welk, the little voice in his head keeps saying, "One, two, three, one, two, three, one, two, three...." |
Quote:
I feel okay if the clock is about a second longer than me, but not any other lee-way. you definitely don't want to call the violation when there are only 9 seconds! You can bet the coach will be watching, especially on a throw-in, especially near the end of a close game. I'm not sure how reliable a microwave is, but it gives you a feel for "faster than the old vet who only does JH now". Try counting as you watch the clock before a game starts. |
Quote:
|
Try the microwave trick.
Stand in front of your microwave and start counting with the timer while using your hand signals. This will give you some idea of how long it takes and you will create a muscle memory of some sorts to be as accurate as possible. Also another trick, look at the clock if it is in view. The higher you move up, the more you will have to take a peek every now and again to get that correct. Because if you are in the backcourt and know the time was :45, you can see how close you were to :35 when your count ends.
Peace |
Quote:
|
I have a foolproof method for practicing my five second count. I live near a retirement community. I drive there and get behind one of the residents at a red light. The time between the light turning green and the person starting to move their car is exactly five seconds.
I haven't yet figured out a method for determining ten seconds, but I always know when it's 4:30 pm. That's when everybody in that community gets in line for their buffet dinner - with free dessert, of course. http://www.dribbleglass.com/subpages/strange/big.jpg [Edited by Mark Padgett on Aug 18th, 2003 at 07:51 PM] |
Cuz.
Quote:
My reason for starting there is because I have 'stopped counting' at those numbers (2,5) so very frequently. That is to say, by 2 seconds and 5 seconds the count usually becomes moot. ...So, why do it? Ain't nobody watching or worrying until the count gets critical at 3,6. My mind is counting, but I do not make it visible. ...Sorta like the count that isn't required in the lane. ;) mick |
And at micks age, he can't afford any wasted motions!
Just kidding! |
Quote:
Yer not kidding. I lost 8% of my weight to help fix that problem, and now I'm only 92% fat. ...Looking forward to some Jr.High games on a small court. mick |
Quote:
|
Duh !!
Quote:
mick |
A really good camp/training mechanism is to have officials line up, close their eyes, and proceed with a visible 10 second count. Very few will be at or under the 10 seconds....most will be well over.
Food for thought...I recommend something like this as a part of your training or even general meetings. Most officials will be VERY surprised that they do not have accurate counts! |
Quote:
|
Every now and again I screw up and say something that actually makes sense..........
|
I can't believe I'm the only guy to say this, but...
15.
|
Yes pennsylvania coach...that just about sums it up...
|
Re: I can't believe I'm the only guy to say this, but...
Quote:
|
Re: I can't believe I'm the only guy to say this, but...
Quote:
Also, for our FEEBLE friends, that's 21.4 in metric.http://www.click-smilies.de/sammlung...smiley-019.gif Hey - you knew it was coming. |
Quote:
I don't have a problem with the backcourt and the throw-in counts you talk about. However, on the closely guarded count, I do not think that you should have any silent count. The way the game is taught now (rightly or wrongly)has the player reacting when they see the arm start the counting motion. Otherwise they are going under the impression that the closely guarded count has not started. If you have the 5 whistle and only 4 flicks, the coach will definitely pick this up when watching the film later, if not from counting your flicks when they happen. |
Quote:
I used to give all the counts, but I went: <li> Left left, right right left left left right right right left right ...too many times to convince myself that it was worth anything. I remain unconvinced, but then I'm left-handed. I cannot imagine the Coaches are watching me for the first couple/few seconds. They use that mental tick of experience to judge the time while watching the action. By the time they even think about watching me, my arm is swinging sharply, above the waist and very close to one second each. ...And besides, I usually only get one closley guarded call every couple games. The way I played the game was in the my man's jock all night long. If the coaches are telling their players to take the ball when the officials' arm is moving, to look at something other than the opponents' eyes, or belly button or ball, ... well, I just cannot believe that. mick |
Mick, we aren't coaching to play defense differently, but I am watching your hand to know when you are actually considering a person to be closely guarded. The rule and its enforcement are usually quite different. If you use the rule, the person does not appear to be "closely guarded," and most refs use something around 3 feet to start their count.
I have never noticed anyone starting the count midway through the closely guarded situation, and I think I would wonder WTH you were doing if the distance between O and D didn't change and the count started well after the closely guarded began. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
My reaction to my TV in the darkness at 1 AM is always, "what about the two seconds before you started counting??!?!!" I like your method, mick. It'd work just fine in my games. I can think of one situation it might cause a little problem--late in the game when we are protecting a lead. I agree that it's difficult for a defender to guard and see the official and count his arm swings, but I have had players smart enough to hold the ball for four arm swings, a quick dribble, hold for a couple more swings then make the pass. |
Quote:
I'll take that under advisement. Certainly, there are critical times when the visible count is most important. http://www.deephousepage.com/smilies/nod.gif mick |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Well you aren't alone in disagreement with my counting technique. My college count is that way, ...the windmill. I have never been one to defend improper mechanics, and I do not make that attempt here. Yet the necessity of the <U>perfectly sychronized visible count</U> during routine action escapes me. Whether I visibly count, or mentally count, my timing counts are very accurate, and that is much closer to the spirit and the intent of the rules of timing requirements than that of a continually swinging arm in increments of 1-1/2 to 1-3/4 seconds. Am I wrong? YU.P. That mechanic seems silly. The CCA manuals and the NFHS manuals are quite clear that the <u>visible count should be used</u>. mick <HR> Imperfection is a human gift. Perfection is a wish. |
Quote:
mick |
Quote:
http://www.kneeguru.co.uk/assets/images/bandwagon.gif |
Well, let's see . . . one second is defined as the period of time that is equal to 9 129 631 700 oscillations of the cesium atom - so just multiply that by five or ten, as needed . . .
|
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:52pm. |