View Single Post
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Wed Nov 27, 2019, 06:08pm
Fan10 Fan10 is offline
Official Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 120
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
This new rule seems to have a least one hole...

Arrow to B. After a try by A1, A5 dunks the ball on a rebound/put-back. An official calls BI on the offense (A) and cancels the basket. Upon review, the BI is overturned. Since the BI call made the ball dead at the time of the suspected infraction, and there is no mention of now counting the goal doesn't seem to be counted.. B gets the ball due to the AP arrow. If the goal was to be counted, why would you go to the arrow?

That doesn't seem at all just. A loses the points and the ball or A gets the points and might get the ball (if they have the arrow).

While there was clearly a need for a change, I don't think this is quite right.

Similarly, it is not just for a defender grabbing a rebound that is called for BI and it isn't. The defender obtained possession. It shouldn't go to the arrow when there is immediate possession that was believed to be BI/GT.
I'm just a fan here, but I read these boards regularly in order to gain a better understanding of the rules.

I was sitting in the stands at a D1 game recently when basket interference was ruled on a dunk tip in. The officials went to the monitor, and I immediately remembered this thread in which there seemed to be a consensus that the bucket cannot count.

After a lengthy review, the referee stepped out in front of the scorer's table and gave the "no basket" signal. The ball was then given to the defense.
The arrow was in favor of the offense, but since the call stood, this was irrelevant.

While I obviously can't read the minds of the officials, the fact that the referee gave the "no basket" signal led me to believe that the basket would have counted if the call had been overturned. Has anybody heard if there is a provision for counting the basket? While I've never been on the floor, I personally think that by the time that the official sees what he believes is a touch while the ball is in the cylinder, processes that info, and blows his whistle, most of the time, the ball is already through the net, which would make the whistle irrelevant since it comes after the bucket. I believe that is what happened here because I did not hear the whistle until after I saw the ball go through the net (though I could have not heard it when it first sounded).

I was just wondering if there was a provision to count the basket. And, if so, does it have to be a situation where the whistle did not come until after the ball was through the net?
Reply With Quote