Lynn Roberts

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Study Guide Question 48 – Concussion Management #1333
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    They both have equal status. The rule is saying that the athlete is NOT suspected of a concussion, and has been cleared by appropriate medical personnel. The LHSAA guideline says that if an athlete is suspected of a concussion, they can’t return to play on the same day. If the athlete is cleared, even if suspected, by the list of approved personnel, they can return.

    Different versions of the same statement.

    Lynn Roberts

    in reply to: Typo on question 110? #1331
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    This is not a typo. Answer the question as written. Lynn Roberte

    in reply to: Study Guide Question 39 #1327
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    The wording of the question as written is correct for the study guide. Answer the question as written by the rule. Thanks for your input! Lynn

    in reply to: Typo on question 126 #1319
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    Yes. It should read that A1 tapped the ball three times, not A3. It is corrected on the computer test if necessary.

    Lynn Roberts

    in reply to: Clips: Over the Back #2 #1313
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    Verticality plays an important part in the discussion of this play. Remember a player has a right to their spot on the floor from there to the ceiling if they obtain their spot legally first. And, remember that a player can jump “back and to the side” as long as they do not displace another player from a legally obtained position. In this video sequence, the player in White jumps “back and to the side” as does the player in Blue. Did the player in White push, displace, or deny the player in Blue a chance to jump? What did the player in White do “illegally” on this play? We should be sure to officiate the player in the back on this play; treat them like you would if refereeing the “defense.” You will see the player in the back push, shove, displace, or deny. OR, you will see the player in the back get illegally displaced or illegally moved by the player in the front.

    in reply to: Clips: Over the Back #3 From the L #1312
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    The Lead may discuss here that there could be a foul earlier in the sequence. If so, the Lead should call that foul. IF not, when you watch this video, ask yourself if the player in the rear did anything “illegal” on this play. If not, there should not be a foul.

    in reply to: Clips: Over the Back #1 #1311
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    Good interpretation by the Web Editor. Lead needs to stay off this one. Trail may have been straight-lined. The Center took a step down, and closed a really good look into a tougher one. If Lead wants to work harder to make this call, move out wider and see the entire play, from a better angle. The Trail needed to be stepping down, towards the basket, rather than moving away.

    “Move to improve!”

    The Center may also have hurt their own look at this play, by stepping down, rather than holding. It looks on the video that the Center actually blocked themselves out of the play by moving down. The Center needs to find that “ONE” offensive player who could create a critical matchup, and move to see that player’s actions. The Center would have seen that there was a gap.

    I am also hoping the the Center discussed this call in their postgame.

    in reply to: 2016-2017 Basketball Rules Changes #1293
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    It is a violation originally. If there is illegal contact, a foul should be called. There must be awareness of the “live ball or dead ball” situation here. If the ball is dead because the free throw has ended, the illegal contact foul here could be a Technical foul.

    in reply to: Clips:No Fist Up 1 #1292
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    I will disagree with the block call in the lower video, the call made by the Lead. The defender sets both feet prior to the offensive player leaving the floor. The defender pulls the right foot back, so there is no forward motion. It is hard to see if the defender leans, but the contact is square and centered on the defender. I need someone to tell me what the defender did that was illegal in this video.

    in reply to: Clips:No Fist Up 1 #1291
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    The stop-clock closed fist is important for both of these calls, more so in the second video. We will have multiple eyes on these calls, and a second whistle can lead to problems. Good patient whistles by the Center in the top video, and the Trail in the second.

    in reply to: Clips:No Fist Up 2 #1290
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    Our host has given us two excellent calls here. The official in each is working the defense, sees Legal Guarding Position, and makes the correct call. Mr. Alexander wants us to use the NFHS Mechanics Signals, so, a stop-clock closed fist should proceed each call. The hand-behind-the head player control signal should also be used. Good patience here by the Trail NOT to have a whistle.

    in reply to: Clips: No Preliminary Signals #1289
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    This is reasonably a duel-area call, where both the Lead and the Center can have a primary whistle. Good eye-contact and the Lead took the call. The defender was a secondary defender, so, good for the Lead to take this one. Remember that the proper NFHS mechanic is the “hand-behind-the-head” player control signal.

    in reply to: Paul Larosal, now that they have said no….. #829
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    Which means we will have to fight even harder to work on other problems, once we force this on the schools….congrats to us….

    in reply to: Paul Larosa, give us the contract offer. #828
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    I don’t understand why we have not seen the proposal. Should have been made accessible to the officials on the day it was presented to the member schools.

    I also don’t understand why there hasn’t been communication between the LHSOA and the working officials. I just wonder about why the discussions of a non-elected Executive Board should be held secret to the members of he body that same board wants to represent. I don’t necessarily need minutes to meetings, but, general information about the what and the why of decisions would be helpful.

    When the board made the decision to “only” deal with fees and the fee structure, that same board left open the possibility that the principals will concede fees, and then hammer officials in other ways. As a basketball official, a member of the group that the principals have impacted the hardest over the past 25 years, I have not seen or heard of anything that will improve our situation “other than the fees.”

    What will the principals do when, a year from now, the LHSOA goes back to the principals with “new” contract proposals to solve the problems that might have been addressed this time?

    in reply to: Paul Larosal, now that they have said no….. #786
    Lynn Roberts
    Participant

    Would not let me correct the spelling of your name. My apology, please.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)