Quote:
Originally Posted by Valley Man
I think it is clear in the comment from the case book play 9.2.10 SIT A:In situations with the clock running and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal shall be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interfere with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous warning had been issued.
|
I fully understand what your'e saying, but ...
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
There is a rule (Rule 10-1-5), and a casebook play (10.1.5 SITUATION D), that specifically state, in very clear terms, that we warn first when a player delays the game by interfering with the ball, by slapping it away, following a goal.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
10-4-5-A: A player shall not: Delay the game by acts such as: Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play.
10.1.5 SITUATION D: Immediately following a goal by A1, A3 slaps the ball
away so that Team B is unable to make a quick throw-in. RULING: The official
shall sound his/her whistle and go to the table to have the scorer record a team
warning for delay. The warning shall then be reported to the head coach of Team A.
Any subsequent delay by Team A shall result in a team technical foul charged
to Team A. (4-47-3)
|
So, based on 9.2.10 SIT A COMMENT: We charge a technical foul with four seconds left, but only warn (assuming no previous warning) with six seconds left?
Also, doesn't even a slight tap of the ball by Team A "interfere with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in", and isn't even a slight tap's "only purpose ... to stop the clock"?
While I see Valley Man's point, I also fully agree with LRZ:
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ
This is one of those NFHS hair-splittings that don't make sense to me: how "unsporting" does conduct have to be to stop the clock and penalize? Where is the line between conduct that must be penalized, with the clock stopping, and conduct that must be ignored?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by LRZ
How momentary is momentary? How delayed is delay versus prevent? I don't see the distinction being clear enough to provide an objective standard.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
4-19-14: An unsporting foul is a noncontact technical foul which consists of unfair, unethical, dishonorable conduct or any behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.
10-2-4: A team shall not: Commit an unsporting foul.
10-4-6: A player shall not: Commit an unsporting foul. This includes, but is not limited to, acts or conduct such as …
|
As LRZ points out, I would like a "more objective" standard from the NFHS.
Right now we've got a smorgasbord of delay, prevent, interfere, warning, technical foul, violation, unsporting, over/under five, stop clock, ignore, advantage/disadvantage, and egregious to choose from.