"New Switch" Progress Report

[Freddy]

OK, so we're about 1/4-1/3 the way through the season. What's going on in your area regarding the "new switch" mechanic the Fed issued to us last year?

Are you doing it?
Did your state ignore it?
Did it devolve to where it's up to each crew?
Is it working well as you've adopted it?

How 'bout a progress report from your "Rome"?

[JRutledge]

What switching mechanic? You mean the one from last year?

Peace

[refinks]

I can't speak for others in my association, but I absolutely hate it. What since does it make for a lead to call a foul going the other way, report it, then have to run all the way down the court and become the new lead? It makes no sense to me. I know many others around my area feel the same way.

However, at most varsity level games I've seen so far, the officials do use the "new switch", probably because they are afraid of getting post season taken away if they don't.

As far as non-varsity and below, some do, some don't. I'm easygoing, I let my partner dictate most of the time. If he wants to long switch on fouls going the other way, we will. If he doesn't, that's fine with me

[SC Official]

South Carolina does not care. The crew decides in pregame whether or not it wants to do the long switches.

[BEAREF]

Originally Posted by refinks

I can't speak for others in my association, but I absolutely hate it. What since does it make for a lead to call a foul going the other way, report it, then have to run all the way down the court and become the new lead? It makes no sense to me. I know many others around my area feel the same way.

However, at most varsity level games I've seen so far, the officials do use the "new switch", probably because they are afraid of getting post season taken away if they don't.

As far as non-varsity and below, some do, some don't. I'm easygoing, I let my partner dictate most of the time. If he wants to long switch on fouls going the other way, we will. If he doesn't, that's fine with me

That probably adds another 7 steps to the process... you really think that's a big deal

[Rich1]

No long switch in Texas. In two man, we only switch on shooting fouls (with some exeptions) & in three man we don't switch on non-shooting fouls in the backcourt.

We did the long switch last year until too many officials complained that no one knew how to do it. We had meetings and power points and multiple officials trying to describe how they thought it worked; all for naught. Our state director of officials person sent out an email mid-season saying we could do it either way.

After no communication prior to the season if we were gonna try it again or abandon the long switch entirely we got an email last week: the long switch is back on.

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Rich1

In two man, we only switch on shooting fouls (with some exeptions)

More precisely, we only switch when the lead calls a shooting foul.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AremRed

We did the long switch last year until too many officials complained that no one knew how to do it. We had meetings and power points and multiple officials trying to describe how they thought it worked; all for naught.

We tried the "no long switch", here in my little corner of Connecticut, a few years ago. No long switch in the backcourt when there is no change of possession. Team A is not in the bonus. A1, dribbling in his back court, is fouled by B1. No change of possession. Team A had possession, and Team A will retain possession after the penalty for the foul is charged (no one and one). Trail (remember, two person Connecticut), reports the foul, and goes back to the trail position. Lead does not initiate a switch, and stays put.

Sounds simple. Right? Wrong. We had guys "no long switching" on player control fouls (charges), and on rebounding fouls. Some officials were lazy, and others just didn't get it.

Now we (again) switch on every single foul, that's right, every single foul; long switches, short switches, medium switches, big, and tall switches, shooting fouls, nonshooting fouls, shoot the breeze fouls, shoot the messenger fouls, they shoot horses, don't they, fouls, etc. You name it, we switch it.

[zm1283]

I assume we're talking about 3-person only here since it was the only thing that changed last year.

I looked at the manual for 2013-2014, but I couldn't figure it out for sure: Was the new switch last year only for when the Lead calls a foul that causes a change of posession? (PC foul, illegal screen, rebounding foul)

I'm pretty sure you never switch in the frontcourt going to the backcourt when the Center or Trail call a foul (Illegal screen for example), or in transition going backcourt to frontcourt (Hand check by the pressing team) when the Center or Trail call a foul. Do I have that right?

Originally Posted by zm1283

I'm pretty sure you never switch in the frontcourt going to the backcourt when the Center or Trail call a foul (Illegal screen for example), or in transition going backcourt to frontcourt (Hand check by the pressing team) when the Center or Trail call a foul. Do I have that right?

Correct.

[Scuba_ref]

Washington State put out a notice that we are no longer doing the long switch. Here is what we got from the State:

"V-Back Mechanic - The change in the NFHS reporting mechanic caused a lot of confusion last year. As agreed upon at the WOA Conference, the WOA will be reverting to the V-Back mechanic: On ANY foul that results in a backcourt throw in for the offended team, the calling official will report foul, V-back to the calling position and then officials will move as if an out of bounds had been called."

[JRutledge]

Since no one seemed to answer the question clearly, I am going to assume we are talking about the long switch with the Lead going off the sideline.

If that is what we are talking about, this mechanic was used last year in Illinois which I was under the impression that the NF adopted.

This mechanic has been confusing for most. When explained the right way we get it right most of the time. But there is a lot of confusion for sure because people have complicated the issue.

All you have to remember is this only applies to the Lead calling a foul, not a trail from going from the BC going to the FC. When that is explained, usually we get it right.

Peace

[Freddy]

Not that I care one way or the other, but what seems various state and local entities have advised their members differently. The crux seems to be this:

What is to be done when "a foul is called and the ball is going from backcourt to frontcourt with no free throws."

What is not defined clearly is "what kind of foul", for example: after a TC foul by team A in its frontcourt? or after a defensive foul by team A with no bonus in team B's backcourt?

The state of Indiana serves as a good example (I don't live there). It sent out six or eight video examples last year which all simulated team A fouling team B in B's backcourt after B's throw-in. On the other hand, the clarification they sent out last week or so from the NFHS (via Referee magazine) showed a six-panel illustration of various plays, all team control fouls by team A in its frontcourt after which team B would have a throw-in in it's backcourt.

I'm not saying I'm for or against it. Just that those who adopted "it" all seem to be complying with "it" in different ways. Or is it not "either/or", rather "both/and"?

(Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right; Here I am, Stuck in the Middle...)

[JRutledge]

Do you really need the type of foul to be defined?

If you are still the lead, that means you do not have a rebound or turnover yet. That means you must have called a loose ball foul, TC or PC fouls for this to even apply. If you are the Trail, the ball has been rebounded by the defense and we would either have started a count for 10 seconds or about to start the count. Again, that is if you are following the mechanic the NF laid out to my understanding. But we must remember that mechanics are guides anyway.

Peace