Switches
 

We have talked about reasoning and logic behind the rules...what about the logic on switches..specifically 2 person mechanics..Is there logic or reasoning behind it?

Switching is still one aspect of my game that needs help:)

If you are talking about foul switching, then yes there is a logic. They do not want the same official calling the same play multiple times without another official having the same view. It just looks and feels better if you call something as the Trail and then you switch and the new Trail calls the same foul in the next live ball period.

Peace

The primary reason is balance in calls made. By switching, each official will be lead for each team approximately the same number of times. If the types of calls each official is making are somewhat different, then switching balances out the differences.

In addition to the above, I think it puts both players in front of the coaches (about) the same amount of time.

I think bob has been passing the 'dutchie' too much today. :p

[QUOTE=The_Rookie;945067]We have talked about reasoning and logic behind the rules...what about the logic on switches..specifically 2 person mechanics..Is there logic or reasoning behind it?

Switching is still one aspect of my game that needs help:)[/QUOTE

it is very important, in fact crucial, that you Switch after fouls are called, especially shooting fouls. It helps to maintain balance, objectivity, and credence towards players and coaches. One of the most frequent complaints of coaches and fans is "call it both ways", if a different ref calls the same violations then that satisfies their critique. Not that they will agree, but it lends a huge amount of objectivity. Plus I like to get away from the lead or trail position, take a mental break. Had a partner who eschewed switching, we conflicted a lot.

During some summer rec ball games partners will wave me back when I go to switch, and tell me not to switch at all. We 'switch' at halftime when the teams switch and we stay on the same end. Yes I know that's bad. Once I was doing this and a fan yelled at me in the first half: "call it both ways!" I replied "I will, in the second half." :D

While I don't mind not switching in such games to some degree, that is too much. At least switch on shooting fouls.

I agree. Now whenever I encounter a partner like this I switch every couple shooting fouls. Not every time, but enough to satisfy my instinct. Summer ball is extremely lazy here, with some guys doing 6, 7, or even 8 games in a day. :eek: Don't get me started.

I know in my area when working games with a running clock (MAYB, YMCA specifically), most officials aren't keen to switching after every single foul call because we are usually doing anywhere from 5-9 games that particular day. I am torn with this, I think it looks really lazy when you call a foul and report it from the baseline, which seems to happen a lot in this type of ball. I try to switch in these type of games whenever possible.

Keep in mind, you're not going to necessarily switch on every single foul call, most of the switches occur when the lead calls a foul (I'm talking 2 man mechanics here). After all, it would be kind of senseless to call a foul from trail and then switch to lead, especially since as the trail you are already near the reporting area. :)

The one question I do have for you all, and I think it's a new NFHS mechanic as of last year, is the long switching on fouls going the other way. In the past, if a lead called a team control foul, he would just simply step out a few steps, report the foul, and go administer the throw-in, saving steps for all officials. Now they want us to switch on those fouls, meaning the lead has to run all the way to the other side of the court? I'm not too sure I like that, nor do most of the officials in my association. What say you?

Why do people even expect the use of all the proper mechanics especially at lower levels where you are asking officials to do more than the probably should in the first place. Heck most youth sports are using body fillers. They are not hiring necessarily the best of the best on any particular game. I have no problem using NFHS Mechanics when we are doing those games. But a middle school game, we might have people who are not licensed at the HS association and to expect that would be silly unless you have two or three willing participants to that philosophy.

Peace

That's how we do it, most times.

If I had a vote, I would vote for "no long switch" in both 2-person and 3-person mechanics.

I don't have a vote. :shrug:

In two man we switch on fouls but splice in a little common sense. You play 3 minutes without a foul. Foul.....switch.....10 seconds later another foul.....It's actually better not to switch at this point. And, yes, saving steps is sometimes a factor in the decision.

I read this thread yesterday, and wouldn't you know it, last night I had a partner who subscribed to the "no long switches" philosophy but forgot to tell me. So I call a foul around half court from the T opposite table, point to the spot (opposite table), move to half court to report my foul, and start heading to the endline to take the L. My partner is still standing there, so now I'm wandering around the court like I don't know where I'm supposed to go. During a break I ask about it, and he says in a situation like that I should just go back to T and administer inbound so he doesn't have to come all the way up there from the L. I've never had a partner tell me this and it just struck me as lazy. He also tossed the ball across the lane to the inbounder a couple times rather than having me switch up top. Something else to pregame I guess.