In a perfect world, maybe. But go to a camp outside your "normal" area...while everything should be the "same" and we have teaching points to follow, those different areas have different takes on certain things and do things a little bit differently. So someone who has gone to a camp in Florida might get a different message that someone who goes to a camp in Michigan or California.

Add to that the fact that there are always officials who have their little quirks or whatever, and you realize that this topic is not something that can be skipped regularly in pre-games. Especially when working with someone you haven't worked with before.

Talk about the new stuff, the changes, skip the stuff that has been around for years. If you're working with a relative rookie, expand it a bit to cover some more basic stuff. But two/three veterans should be talking about stuff more than basic mechanics.

At the very least I want to pre-game and know how my partners expect to indicate they're on-ball. That way I know what to look for during the game.

Of course, I've had them say one thing then either not do it or do something else. Makes me wonder about the efficacy of including it in the pre-game but, to the point others have made, it helps to remind me of things I need to concentrate on.

What the what?

Admittedly I don't work college ball but if this is the attitude of college officials I want no part of it.

What would you tell the coach if you were T and the C didn't pick up the play (for whatever reason) and you moved on right before the star gets hammered? "Sorry coach, that wasn't my call. Don't know why dipshirt didn't blow, you need to ask him."?

SMH

2-3 veteran refs should already know the "new stuff" by the time the season starts.

I'd rather talk about floor mechanics and coverage areas, especially as they relate to plays that I or my partners have seen missed in our games and other people's games.

It's not a matter of attitude. Nevada probably had the best answer: Turn your shoulders to the match-up and/or start a 5-second count. If I'm T and my C starts a count (in my case that's only going to be when someone is holding the ball) it doesn't take setting off a flare to tell me they have the ball. However if we don't mention it during pregame - and I've been in some games where we do and some where we don't - I'm not going in there in a panic wondering when to pick up the ball, mainly because we've all heard the same teaching points. Watch your partner and key off them.

As to the question: I'm T and the ball is in C's area and the BH/D is fouled in front of them but there's no whistle that's probably a whole crew failure. If the ball is just at the opposite - from me - LLE then I shouldn't have let it go in the first place until I glanced at my partner. If it's clearly in the C's area then some sort of rotation should have been in process if not completed because if the C isn't looking at the play and it's right next to them that means there are felonies taking place in the post so the L should have rotated.

If I have to constantly talk about new stuff, we have issues. The only way I might talk about something new is how we might have to change what we do if a new rule is introduced. The best example I can come up with is the NCAA situation when the 10 second visible count was eliminated and any official could theoretically call a 10 second violation. I hardly ever even discussed the freedom of movement rules in pre-games.

Peace

Mechanics are rarely talked about in any of the college pre games I have been involved in. At that level, I think most people are pretty confident where there partners are going to be and the expectations. Usually, me and most of the people I work with at that level are more concerned about matchups, identifying the *******s on each team, types of offense and defense to expect from each team. Maybe in the first few weeks we cover anything new, including rules or mechanics, but that doesn't continue after the first few weeks of the season. If one of the guys still does a lot of high school games, we might spend a few minutes reviewing the differences, both rules and mechanics, between hs and college, but that is really the only time I have ever participated in a pregame that spends much, if any time on the subject.

As far as a coach asking about his player getting fouled. If I am watching the play, then he will get an answer as to what I saw or didn't see. If I moved to another matchup because the ball moved to a partner's area, then I will tell the coach I was watching a matchup off ball, and if he wants a better explanation he can ask the official covering the play the next time that official is in front of him. I will never use the words that it was somebody else's call, but I have no problem telling him what I was doing and who was officiating the play. If it is a play I should have had, and missed, I wont hesitate to tell him that either. Regardless, he will accept my explanation, even if he doesn't like it and move on. If he doesn't, the rules give me plenty of tools to compel him to do so.

The point is that if I talked about everything where someone said "gotta pre-game that", we'd still be having the pre-game a hour after the game ended.

In my opinion, you should talk about something. That does not mean you have to talk about the same things every single time. If I have worked with the guys a few times, we might talk more about the teams and the tendencies than anything. If I have never worked with someone, I want to talk about certain things so I know what those guys are thinking or philosophies are or what they prefer to do. I do not want the court to be the first time I know a partner has a specific tendency or philosophy.

Peace

Agree.

We should pre-game what we're going to pre-game too! ;)

Thanks for Previous Responses
 

Thanks for responses thus far. These two are typical of what we do and teach. Around here we call it "Hockey Player", as in the game popular to most of us where the players go like this:
Hockey Player - On/Off-Ball Concept
What results is as these two examples illustrate:
Hockey Player - On/Off-Ball Example 1
Hockey Player - On/Off-Ball Example 2

The reason for my original post was, however, not to justify what we do here. I've been studying what they do on the NBA level. Given the interviews and presentations on the topic I've heard by Joe Crawford, Monty McCutchen, Brent Barnaky, and others, it's apparent they want their C (slot) to remain open to the floor, thus shoulders parallel to the sideline at almost all times. What they say they do is confirm whether partner is on- or off-ball by taking a glance at his eyes. Which is great if a those composing the random crews of high school officials, given various levels of expertise and experience, could actually do that with any sort of effectiveness. Which is why it seems better to do and teach, as respondents also stated, a more "whole body" indication instead of just trying to look at the eyes. Much easier to pick up on.

Is that an overstatement re. what you know about what the NBA does and teaches?? Does NCAA do the same?

BTW, it's all-too-common that if this is not pregamed, about two minutes into the game the veneer of veteranhood the partner gives off in the lockerroom peels off and it's apparent very soon that he's a rampant, rabid, pathetic ballwatcher with little if any clue as to the concept of PCA coverage, let alone possessing any semblance of knowledge of what on-ball or off-ball means and why to care about it. The veterans are the worst at this. Can't assume everyone knows it, so it's covered to an extent every game.

Repetitio mater studiorum est = "Repetititititition is the mother of learning." :)

In On/Off-ball Example Number 1 I think the shoulder turns are way too extreme. I subscribe to the floor philosophy that the NBA teaches. The 2nd on/off ball example link does not work.

I'll be in Joey Crawford's teaching camp Friday & Saturday, I'll ask about it during film breakdown.

I agree the shoulder turns in example 1 are too extreme.

All of this movement is unnecessary and may lead to missing a call. Having the C stay parallel with the sideline allows them to maintain a wider viewing angle, which gives them the ability to pick up players more quickly as they move into their PCA. By fully turning the body, the officials in the video are closing off and limiting their viewing angle.

If I have a question about whether or not C has picked up a dribbler, I'll see him in my peripheral vision. I don't look for his eyes, but I can see the direction his head is turned.

You have been validated by at least 2 NBA Finals officials. :cool: