BirdBrain

…there are some ….:banana:

So people hate it when fans yell at a ref ? Or the people sitting next to the people yelling at the ref hate getting hung up on semantics ?

Contact with coaches working in front of their benches happens often with players and officials and typically in transition situations. In defense of this coach, based on the pics, he couldn't have known the kid was going to put up a shot when he did, there does not appear to be contact during the play, and if the shooter drifted after the shot in transition, no big deal. From a pure rules standpoint, the coaching box is not on the playing surface, so if the coach is "out of the box" and anything occurs that involves that, it needs to be officiated, but not necessarily as an infraction. Preventive officiating once again should prevail in this case...if there was contact that didn't involve the play, a simple reminder to the coach is usually the better choice.

This fall under "Preventive Officiating"....the answer is: No Way

Nah, you give me way too much credit....I was just too lazy to figure out where the thread was that asked about the scholly winners and posted it up there, knowing that someone else would drag it back where it belonged....but you're welcome for me tracking them down... I'm a delegator, not a details guy.... :banana:

Crosstown Scholarship Winners: BBHS - Taylor Young CCHS - Emily Robertson

I want to be there when that explanation happens....:popcorn:

Once the team possesses, or has control, they have until a count of 10 to get into frontcourt. A tip or touch doesn't necessarily demonstrate control...we are looking for team control. If you watch a backcourt count you will find great variation amongst officials, some slower, some faster. Compare that to time expired on the game clock and you can see why it is a 10 "count" not necessarily 10 "game seconds"

5 seconds to "release" the ball

I'm checking in with that "other" site administrator....I got some connections :thumb:

I'll try to be as clear as possible to help you understand…the reason there are 3 officials on the court is to cover more court. In no way should all 3 officials ever be looking at the exact same play in this scenario. So I will have to say you are absolutely and entirely wrong that a 3rd ref could "easily have a good view"….. See if this helps you understand what each should be looking at…..what you are describing is a train wreck that I would be highly suspect of…..

I will wait patiently while you provide the Section and Article that contains this information…..

So on your first part, why not just keep a coin at the scorers table and flip it when you have one ? Isn't that the same as asking the 3rd official for a "tiebreaker ruling"? As for the bolded, already have, and already do....

Not if he / she is officiating their primary area....because they would have no way of seeing it....

So you are not an official, yet you somehow are omnipotent ? Awesome.... Many would argue, this is one of the dumbest statements about officiating ever put into text type.... Not sure what your friends are doing, but this has been the primary point of emphasis for past few years. ie; hand checking, post play, etc...

In this scenario, I would say yes. ("C" as described in scenario, not by the graphic below) The Lead official in transition, who is running with the break, would be primary IMO and should take this call for a couple reasons: 1) They probably have best look 2) It looks best because they are closest In a non-transition situation, it depends, and is usually discussed in pre-game. The slot official (opposite lead) would take it all the way to the rim, the trail official would release this to lead. It can change, but it should always be agreed upon prior to game.

This is a pre-game issue...and I say this every time.... Blow and Hold....it's that simple. In no way is an official obligated to "over quick" a call....just blow the whistle, signal to stop clock, look at your partner and release to primary.... I do believe that more often than not a blarge is being "over quick"

I think some of us know who you run with....you probably should lower your expectations of your boys !

Nice job. Well thought out, well scouted.... For an old guy you sure do keep a lot of information in your head....

Ongoing struggle at Heritage in multiple sports....

Very consistent today aren't we ?

Don't fool yourself, these kids are in "the system" that you speak of...so again, yes, if the coach decides they want a kid on Varsity because of what they have seen, irrespective of where they have seen it...they are the coach and their job is to put what they believe is the best team of players on their court...earned or not, the coach wants what they want based on what information they have gleaned.

Yes, that's why they are still coaching....in particular if they have watched any of these kids on the summer circuit, then they know what they have...no questions

This statement does not mean that a player didn't earn that move....I totally disagree with your premise that just because a kid is moved to varsity, at any time, and (your words) "marked early and automatically moved up" that the kid didn't earn it. Again, do you think these coaches haven't seen these kids play enough to know what they have ? Your position is much, much more of an indictment of an entire coaching staff, that has had some incredible success the past few years, rather than a kid being "automatically moved up". Pretty sure these coaches evaluate talent on a daily and weekly basis....maybe a little respect for their decisions is in order ?

A faculty led Pep Committee ?