"Don't point fingers"

[JRutledge]

Technically, the state cares. Is it a deal breaker? Nope.

Peace

[Rich]

I'm not sure a lot of people care. His Twitter feed is amusing.

I'm a big fan of doing things right, but this guy sounds like it's a religion to him.

[JRutledge]

Well he goes on and on about doing things right, but he never seems to say what level he is talking about. Many levels do not have mechanics that do what he suggests.

Peace

When you point at things in real life, do you use four fingers or one? Why should your pointing on the court be any different?

Honestly it varies state-by-state and official-by-official but my personal belief is simple: I don't give a crap about your "signal package" as long as you are communicating adequately. IMO the approved signals are not there to get everyone looking the same for posterity, they are there to provide a set of guidelines for clear communication as to what calls you are making. If my signals do the same job communicating what I have while looking stronger and selling my call better, I am going to use those better signals. Your mileage may vary.

An aside: I was recently discussing a play on the court during a timeout and pointed to the spot of the play. After the game one of my P's told me never to point when discussing a play -- people in the crowd might see it and think we are discussing something because we got it wrong. Is that something I should care about?

[Freddy]

No problems when it's done by the book (cf. Faceless Pictograph Guy/Girl):
5-4-1.
5 - Upraised open hand subsequent to whistle for violation
4 - Direction play will resume
1 - Location of throw-in (used to be 2, but picto-graph guy changed last year)

A "deal-breaker"? Maybe not with all responsible authorities. But it's promoted as the standard for signaling and just looks good when everyone in the pool does it the same.

As to general pointing, no big deal.

Pointing to the bench of the team who fouled (the "Accusatory Point") when reporting to the table was branded "verboten" and considered unapproved several years ago.

Pointing at the spot of the violation when no approved signal is given is approved by the manual. Nothing impolite about that.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AremRed

An aside: I was recently discussing a play on the court during a timeout and pointed to the spot of the play. After the game one of my P's told me never to point when discussing a play -- people in the crowd might see it and think we are discussing something because we got it wrong. Is that something I should care about?

I've had a couple of mentors who are adamant about not pointing or doing any type of arm movements while having a discussion with partners, and especially with coaches.

[bob jenkins]

If your assignor cares, you should care.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Technically, the state cares. Is it a deal breaker? Nope.

Peace

Same here, and same with the assigner. It gets mentioned every year during meetings.

[Kansas Ref]

I use two appressed fingers to indicate directionality. I've seen a few officials use the one finger to indicate directionality and I'm not a fan of it--as it just looks too shall I say "pedestrian" i.e., common place and not ascribed to a profession. But that is just me being pompous
Our manual shows an open hand to show direction, but I use an open hand with fingers appressed to indicate a violation.
Don't most of you think that using one finger is not a good look?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Kansas Ref

...
Don't most of you think that using one finger is not a good look?

In this part of the country, especially at the college level, it's the norm to use 1 finger.

[Rob1968]

When I asked an official why he uses 2 fingers to indicate direction, he said "Because it looks stronger than 1 finger, why?" (did I ask)
When I replied that the manual shows a full hand - that is, all 4 fingers - which then, must be stronger than 2 fingers, he frowned, and had no further reply.
It's notable, in my area, that most of the higher ranked officials - those who consider themselves to be among the power elite - use 2 fingers. It seems that they do it because they feel that it sets them apart from the common, lower ranked officials, who just do what the manual indicates.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

When I asked an official why he uses 2 fingers to indicate direction, he said "Because it looks stronger than 1 finger, why?" (did I ask)
When I replied that the manual shows a full hand - that is, all 4 fingers - which then, must be stronger than 2 fingers, he frowned, and had no further reply.
It's notable, in my area, that most of the higher ranked officials - those who consider themselves to be among the power elite - use 2 fingers. It seems that they do it because they feel that it sets them apart from the common, lower ranked officials, who just do what the manual indicates.

I've started assigning for 21 high schools (for all sports) and I couldn't possibly care about stuff like this. Neither do my coaches. I just want guys in the right position who make the right calls.

One finger is fine as long as it isn't THAT finger.

I won't speak for my state office, cause I can't -- I know they're not as pedantic the one posted about above me, though.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

When I asked an official why he uses 2 fingers to indicate direction, he said "Because it looks stronger than 1 finger, why?" (did I ask)
When I replied that the manual shows a full hand - that is, all 4 fingers - which then, must be stronger than 2 fingers, he frowned, and had no further reply.
It's notable, in my area, that most of the higher ranked officials - those who consider themselves to be among the power elite - use 2 fingers. It seems that they do it because they feel that it sets them apart from the common, lower ranked officials, who just do what the manual indicates.

I am a clinician with my state (which means that I am licensed to run camps for my state) and I can tell you I do not care that much about that kind of stuff. I might at best tell someone to use a full hand, but that is because I usually cannot find many things to talk about if that is my comment. Secondly, I have yet to see a single person with any extensive experience to give the signal for "Bonus free throw" which is signal #18. It looks stupid if that is your signal most of the time and most officials I know just hold each arm up with their index finger being used as if they were reporting in the NBA. And I rarely ever see someone give a "block" signal with both hands out and not with their fists. That last one is talked about a lot, but rarely talked about.

The overall point, most people never notice these things unless you have an officiating background and you wish to point it out. Just like no one knows our rotations or a missed rotation unless you have an officiating background. Never had a coach ever say, "You missed that rotation too."

Even signal #19 is relatively new and reflects what we were doing long before the book reflected that look. We used the kicking violation signal for years before it was in the book.

With all this being said, we only care about this stuff as officials and most officials do not are either way. If the people that hire us are more concerned about the idiosyncrasy of a signal, instead of getting plays right or communicating with partners or coaches, then I probably do not want to work for them in the first place.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am a clinician with my state (which means that I am licensed to run camps for my state) and I can tell you I do not care that much about that kind of stuff. ...

Peace

I had the privilege of being an observer at a D3 camp. One of the campers asked me a question about how to do his signals. I told him to do whatever he feels makes him look strongest on the court. If the supervisor or another observer comments on anything, then use that opportunity to show you can adjust and that you are coachable.

I'm in the mindset of "do what you do until someone tells you to do it differently."