Coaches understanding LGP
 

JV G today, lopsided game, visitors defeated home handily. (Varsity game was similar.)

Coach H had a little difficulty understanding LGP. My partner had a charge against H on in the first half, and I had two charges on H in the second half. For both of my calls, the defender was moving backwards at the time of contact, but LGP was established. I'll give Coach H credit for being patient (he's not working with much, only eight players), but he looked like he needed an explanation, so I provided one after I reported the foul...

Coach: "I just don't understand...."
Me: "Sure, the defender established LGP, and maintained it moving backwards."
Coach: "Were her feet set?"
Me (wincing a little): "That's a myth, Coach. That whole 'set' thing is a myth."

With that, I take off for the other end-line.

I'm not crazy about this exchange, for two reasons. First, as soon as the coach said "set," he lost me. We don't have time to conduct clinics here. Second, I actually said "LGP" (the initials, not the term) and that must have confused him. I used refspeak, and I believe the wrong choice here.

Question 1: Who has a better, concise explanation that reaches coaches who have bought into the "set" myth?

Question 2: What's it going to take to eradicate this myth? We're not taking about an obscure rule here; LGP understanding is fundamental to block/charge.

Try this.

"Coach, the defender was moving backwards and your player still managed to run her over!"

I think you were close. To appease the coaches who are educated by TV color commentators who usually use the term "set" over "legal guarding position" (which I believe is the root of the problem), I would just say:

"Yes, her feet were set initially and then she maintained legal guarding position."

When I was first-year official and didn't understand this rule, I called a block that should have been a charge because the defender had LGP but was moving backward. I said to the incredulous coach, "he wasn't set." The coach very patiently challenged me to take a closer look at the rule. I did, and I've been educated ever since. My point? It's too bad we can't say the same thing in reverse to a coach, but invariably asking them to take a closer look at a rule comes across as insulting. So I'd use the more indirect approach of using a phrase like "maintained legal guarding position" in the hopes that it at least causes the coach to pause long enough to think, "hmmmmm" while I go back to officiating.

My only issue with this is the use of the word set. A defender is never required to be set, or to have been set at any point. Nothing about gaining or maintaining LGP requires a player to be set.

For me, if "she had legal position" doesn't work, the only cure is a clinic for which we don't have time.

As I see it, I think we should avoid the word "set" altogether.

As I came to understand it (before I started wearing stripes), "set" meant feet planted firmly, lateral with each other, with an immobile body. With "set," it couldn't happen in an instant; there had to be evidence that the defender stood still, and stayed still.

Of course, we all know better here. We only need an instant to identify obtained LGP. What we see as LGP, some see as a moving defender, and nothing more, because they're still looking for a defender to be "set."

The right words are vital to getting the point across, so we call can understand the rules and their applications. To me, "set" belongs in the same category as "over the back" and "reaching foul." It muddies the waters of communication. People visualize "set" as something that has nothing to do with the LGP rule, and only when they look for what we look for, they'll understand.

(Aside to Nevada: Thanks, I'll try that one.)

"Defender established and maintained legal guarding position."

Coming Soon, To A Sportorial Magazine Near You ...
 

Things Officials Should Probably Not Be Saying In A Game

Calvin Coolidge once said, "The things I did not say never hurt me." Of course, he was not talking about basketball, but many officials would be smart to heed his sage advice as they communicate with coaches, and players.

Good communication skills are important tools to have on any official’s tool belt. Good communication with a partner, with a player, or with a coach, can go a long way to maintaining control of the game, having good game management, and having a smooth game. Sometimes this communication takes place in oral form, talking to players, or coaches, in some cases to explain a ruling, or in other cases to prevent a violation, or a foul. However, probably for reasons of tradition, there have been things that officials often, or sometimes, say during a game that do not have any basis in the rules, and should probably not be said in a game. This article will cover some of those “best left unsaid” statements.

“He wasn’t set”, is often an official’s answer to a coach who is questioning a blocking foul on his player. This implies that a defensive player must be set, and can’t move, to take a charge, while, in reality, the rules say otherwise. A defensive player does not have to remain stationary to take a charge. A defender may turn away or duck to absorb contact, provided he, or she, has already established legal guarding position, which is both feet on the playing court and facing the opponent. The defender can always move backwards, or sideways, to maintain a legal guarding position, and may even have one, or both feet, off the floor when contact occurs. That player may legally rise vertically. However, if the defender is moving forward, then the contact is caused by the defender, which, in this case, is a blocking foul.

Finally, a thought by Will Rogers, “Never miss a good chance to shut up.”

If they cannot get it after that, not my problem. I do not have to explain much more than that and what they say is not going to change my call anyway.

It is up to them to know what the rules actually says. It is not my place to teach them.

Peace

Coaches aren't alone. We have officials that can't get it.

Thankfully most of those guys hang out on Facebook.

I had a HC tell me last month that the ball handler had every right to run over the defender in a situation just like you described, :eek:!

MTD, Sr.

Lately, I have been running into officials, usually the old timers or those who have been around awhile, who think that if the defender is under the basket or behind and an airborne shooter runs them over that they won't call a charge. Their rationale is that the player can't really play defense from there so why reward them. What do you all think about this? has the rule changed in HS to what it is now? Are they just trying to roll over the NBE and NCAA with the RA that isn't there? How do you respond to someone like that?

By asking the individual if he can read and directing him to this Case Book ruling:

10.6.1 SITUATION C: B1 is standing behind the plane of the backboard before
A1 jumps for a lay-up shot. The forward momentum causes airborne shooter A1
to charge into B1. RULING: B1 is entitled to the position obtained legally before
A1 left the floor. If the ball goes through the basket before or after the contact
occurs, the player-control foul cancels the goal. However, if B1 moves into the
path of A1 after A1 has left the floor, the foul is on B1. B1’s foul on the airborne
shooter is a foul during the act of shooting. If the shot is successful, one free
throw is awarded and if it is unsuccessful, two free throws result. (4-19-1, 6; 6-
7-4; 10 Penalty 2, 5a)

I am one of those old timers that WILL call the charge.

MTD, Sr.

I don't have my NFHS books from the year that the specific editorial change was made, in Rule 4-23, which removed the word "establish" and inserted the word "obtain", in regards to LGP.
The explanation was that the phrase "establish LGP" seemed to refer to a process, that takes some amount of time, and that the phrase "obtain LGP" better denotes the moment that LGP exists, thus enhancing the concept of LGP regarding actions that are legal/illegal from that point on.

As a player, at the time, having officiated for several years, I was challenged by an opponent regarding whether I had been "set" when I took a charge. I offered him the use of my books, which were in my gym bag, and bet him he couldn't find the word "set" in the Rules book. After several minutes of frantically scouring the book, he threw it on the bench in frustration. Oh, and he didn't pay the bet, either.

Don't feel bad. A 15 year veteran official owes me 40 bucks that I'll never see. 20 because he thought long sleeve undershirts were illegal and 20 because he thought when the defense violated first on a free throw a violation by the shooter was ignored.

I guess that wasn't you I saw last month. I took a drive to a different part of the state to see a game, and saw a defender crashed into while stationary and having LGP under the backboard. The old-timer called a block.

How much of this is really that all of the myths re: block charge (whether invented or adaptations to an old rule) result in the charge not being called.

- Defender has to be stationary.
- Defener cannot be moving.
- Defender can't be too deep.

You never hear myths esposing making it easier to draw charges. The reality is that most players, coaches and a lot of officals whether just using rules or applying myths feel like the number of conditions that have to be met in order for it to be a charge simply mean most plays aren't charges. Therefore they want/expect all close plays to the naked eye to go to the offense.


ON the flip side:

I work with a lot of guys who no call a lot more than I am comfortable no calling but when in Rome. THat being said I feel like crews I work on (myself included) tend to be more often sure that we know its a block than being sure we know its a charge. So when I look back at tape to judge performance if forced to make a call in areas I let go/no called I would have more PC's or borderline PC's on my no calls then I would blocks.

I would actually expect this call more from newbies who have NBA/NCAA games they watch on TV in their head instead of the NFHS rules . . . one of the joys of CYO middle school hoops in our area is we ahve such a wide variety of refs some who know (at least mostly) the rules and some who call based on whatever they've seen on TV.

Very, very fw seem to have a clue on charges -- perhaps becuase defenders playing for a charge are few and far between at that point and they aren't watching for it . . . but if I had a nickel for every "block" that was more of a "failed to get out of the way of the out of control driver" . . .

You're not going to get the cream of the crop in these games - more the sludge from the bottom. And the coaches and parents don't know the rules either. There's nothing to gain from reffing these games if you're an experienced official.

Unless you can help train up-and-coming newbies... much easier to teach 'em the right way right away than try to break bad habits later.

If I had a choice, CYO middle school ball would be one of my last choices to train anyone. They likely don't have a decent pool of officials in the first place, and in order to have the vast majority of that pool be competent, you'd have to pay them a decent amount of money. It's just not likely on all kinds of fronts.

Oh, I'm well aware of that!! (And I try really hard not to get upset at the bonehead calls -- gets hard when kids get hammered and refs are oblivious, but really, I try!) In our CYO end of year play-offs, when we get to the final rounds, we sometimes see a quality HS team come in to do those games . . . which is really appreciated -- it's fun to see a three-man team of "real" officils who come in and treat the game seriously with teamwork, etc. (Indeed, in the coaches training, we were warned not to expect good referees but to bear with them . . . .)

On the lemons-to-lemonaid side, it gives us the opportunity to teach the kids that they have to adapt to the officials and figure out what is a foul today without getting hung up on what it was last game . . .

What is there to gain from calling any game? I don't get this. Whatever the level, if you're available and you're asked, if you want to go, go, and if you don't, don't go.

For an experienced official, a CYO Middle School game offers nothing that will make that official better in any faze of the game. I think you'd have to reach pretty far to say that this represents an opportunity to "see plays" and learn anything. There's very little structure as there is in school district middle school games. If you want to go work these games, knock yourself out.

Agree whole-heartedly. There are just some games I will not do. My AAU assignors know that I will not volunteer my services for any games below 12 years old. I also no longer do any youth or adult rec leagues or military intramurals. Way too easy for me to get into bad habits when working games I have no interest in doing, so I stay away from them.

I can train officials much better at high school games. There are more standards. There are procedures that must be followed. What is expected at one school is expected at another school anywhere in the state of Illinois for example. I might have 15 different standards or leagues working a middle/junior high contest.

There is a reason we do not run a single high school camp at a middle school game or contest is involved.

I will gladly pass if the goal is to train someone. I would have to be doing it for the easy money first and then training a distant 100 on the list of 100.

Peace

Thanks for adding these points - I didn't even think about the poor mechanics and varying rules these leagues tend to have. I stopped working adult rec leagues many years ago - the last straw was because my assignor happened to play in one of these leagues and he ended up winning the award for the player most often ejected from games for being a jacka$$. Oh the irony. You can't pay me enough to put up with a bunch of whiny adult never-was-but-thought-they-were's.

Closed Your Eyes And Went To Heaven ...
 

You guys wouldn't recognize the games that I often work as Catholic middle school games. Real uniforms (not just T-shirts with numbers), knowledgeable coaches, trained adult timers, and scorers. All the schools have great "subvarsity" (below eighth grade) programs (some with three age group teams below the eighth grade level). Great concession stands (one makes tremendous breakfast sandwiches). League, state, and New England tournament at the end of the season.

Our assigner sits on the league board of directors. Coaches have to attend a mandatory new rules meeting at the start of each season. Officials are expected to show up in full uniform (no sweats, no sneakers). All Fashion Police rules are enforced. Assignments are made through Arbiter. Our assigner hosts (and pays for) a Holiday Pizza Party every year at a local pizza joint, all the pizza, and beer, you can eat, and drink.

We used to have a preseason IAABO Refresher Exam study group until our "high school board" decided it was a great idea and copied it, and now it's mandatory that we go to one of the "high school board" Refresher Exam study groups.

All our officials are "certified" IAABO officials. About 75% are high school varsity officials, the rest are junior varsity (subvarsity) officials. 25% of our forty Catholic middle school officials made the state public high school tournament list last year, and we've got a handful of college officials working these Catholic middle school games.

Our assigner recruits only the best young officials to join our group, all young officials are vetted before they join us, they have to come highly recommended. Young officials don't apply, they have to be invited.

Some relaxed mechanics. We don't switch on every foul, and don't always make it all the way to the reporting area. Lead will occasionally inbound with a bounce pass across the lane to avoid the trail moving across the court.

Veterans are expected to offer constructive criticism to the younger guys, and gals, and help them move up the public high school officiating ladder.

"Varsity" (eighth grade, seven minute periods) double header (a boys game, and a girls game): $86.00. "Subvarsity" (below eighth grade, six minute periods) doubleheaders, or tripleheaders: $30.00 per game.

Who You Gonna Call ???
 

https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6230/6...473e048e_m.jpg

That's why we have "The List":

A defensive player does not have to remain stationary to take a charge. A defender may turn away or duck to absorb contact, provided he or she has already established legal guarding position, which is both feet on the playing court and facing the opponent. The defender can always move backwards or sideways to maintain a legal guarding position and may even have one or both feet off the floor when contact occurs. That player may legally rise vertically. If the defender is moving forward, then the contact is caused by the defender, which is a blocking foul.

AARGH!! :mad: I have an intense dislike of when that happens. Even MTD, Jr., knows to call that a charge.

MTD, Sr.

Agreed. It is sometimes amazing what one sees when one takes a drive to a different part of the state to see a game.