Rule question

jTheUmp

seanwestref wrote
Ok, got another one. I am the trail. Team A has gathered a defensive rebound and is in their backcourt. Player A1 is dribbling the ball towards the division line, while team B is pressing. Player A1 passes the ball from his backcourt location to A2, who was located in the frontcourt, but is jumping and lands in the backcourt. A2, in mid-jump, taps the ball back to A2. Due to A2's previous location being in the frontcourt, I call an over and back violation. Is this correct? Does it matter if the pass-back is a tap or with two hand?

APG posted the appropriate case play.

"But jTheUmp", you say "that case play deals with a non-airborne player, and my situation deals with an airborne player."

The fact that the player was airborne doesn't make any difference. Airborne players retain the status (inbounds, OOB, front court, backcourt) that they had prior to going airborne. Or, as has been more eloquently stated here previously:
"You are where you were until you get where you're going"

tl;dr: You got the call correct, it does not matter if the pass (or tap) is with one hand or two.

[deleted]

jTheUmp wrote
tl;dr: You got the call correct, it does not matter if the pass (or tap) is with one hand or two.

Thanks!

Another question: I having been working solely two-man, but have an upcoming three-man game. What advice would you give me so my first time goes smoothly?

bainsey

Indianaref wrote
I have yet to have a captain request this.

Likewise, though in nearly every MSG game I've worked, the beginning of every quarter is a defensive match-up. I never deny it.

ODog

How has this thread reached three pages without anyone calling B.S. on Seanwestref's questions?

I know and respect the spirit of treating everyone with an open mind, but ...

There is absolutely NO WAY he is an official who has ever sat through any sort of class or passed any sort of test. NO. WAY.

I'm not saying he doesn't do games at some level somewhere, but suddenly 3-whistle games? Please.

BillyMac

CMHCoachNRef wrote
It is not requested largely because coaches have no idea the rule exists.

Because, for a few years back in the 1990's, it didn't exist. For some reason, it was inadvertently left out of the rule book, and then reinstated. No reason, no explanation. My local IAABO interpreter told me that I was one of only a few officials, nationally, that noticed the error, that led to having the rule reinstated. I don't know if that's true, or not. Maybe he just told me that to make me feel important.

BillyMac

ODog wrote
How has this thread reached three pages without anyone calling B.S. on Seanwestref's questions?

I just don't like him "shifting gears" in the middle of a thread. It's like he's hijacking his own thread. He should try clicking on the new thread button. It works every time.

APG

ODog wrote
How has this thread reached three pages without anyone calling B.S. on Seanwestref's questions?

I know and respect the spirit of treating everyone with an open mind, but ...

There is absolutely NO WAY he is an official who has ever sat through any sort of class or passed any sort of test. NO. WAY.

I'm not saying he doesn't do games at some level somewhere, but suddenly 3-whistle games? Please.

No, there's nothing the OP has asked that is necessarily out of the ordinary for newer officials. Just because you may have found them to be rudimentary or easy doesn't mean a new official will pick it up off the bat.

And you don't know the circumstances behind why the official is working 3-man.

And to the seanwestref...if you have drastically different scenarios not related to the original thread, you'd have an easier time getting answers by starting a new thread.

[deleted]

BillyMac wrote
I just don't like him "shifting gears" in the middle of a thread. It's like he's hijacking his own thread. He should try clicking on the new thread button. It works every time.

APG wrote
...if you have drastically different scenarios not related to the original thread, you'd have an easier time getting answers by starting a new thread.

Thanks! I will create a new thread from now on. In this case, I thought I would knock out all my questions in one place instead of cluttering the front page.

APG

seanwestref wrote
Thanks! I will create a new thread from now on. In this case, I thought I would knock out all my questions in one place instead of cluttering the front page.

You could make one thread and ask about multiple scenarios.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

just another ref wrote
If you request it, you're a captain.

+1,000 plus a fine Cuban cigar.

MTD, Sr.

just another ref

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. wrote
+1,000 plus a fine Cuban cigar.

MTD, Sr.

Smoking is bad for you and Cuban cigars are illegal in this country.

How'd you get to be a moderator?😃

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

just another ref wrote
Smoking is bad for you and Cuban cigars are illegal in this country.

How'd you get to be a moderator?😃

As a Godfather from Youngstown, Ohio, I made Brad an offer he couldn't refuse, 😀.

MTD, Sr.

maven

just another ref wrote
Smoking is bad for you and Cuban cigars are illegal in this country.

Possessing Cuban cigars is not illegal. Importing, distributing, and selling them are illegal. 😉

[deleted]

ODog wrote
How has this thread reached three pages without anyone calling B.S. on Seanwestref's questions?

Maybe because they are more polite than you? What would "calling BS" on my questions look like? Am I not allowed to ask simple, basic questions? (sarcasm here, also rhetorical)

APG wrote
Just because you may have found them to be rudimentary or easy...

Ah, there it is. I am not advanced enough for ODog. Good thing others are more tolerant of young officials, and are willing to help them with questions almost every young official deals with.

Down, ODog, Down! Bad ODog!

ODog wrote
I know and respect the spirit of treating everyone with an open mind, but ...

I hope your friends have learned to simply ignore anything you say after "but", because I am fast learning to. You are a lot more polite before you put in the "but".

ODog wrote
There is absolutely NO WAY he is an official who has ever sat through any sort of class or passed any sort of test. NO. WAY.

"Absolutely NO WAY"? How confident are you? Would you stake your life on it? Taking the (in my area) NFHS test is not that difficult. It is, after all, an open-book test. (yes I passed)

ODog wrote
I'm not saying he doesn't do games at some level somewhere, but suddenly 3-whistle games? Please.

Again with the "but". Yes, "suddenly 3-whistle games". If you want to know how I got this opportunity, simply ask me. Otherwise: http://i.imgur.com/06hE1.gif

APG wrote
And you don't know the circumstances behind why the official is working 3-man.

Again, you don't know.

ODog wrote
Please.

And thank you, good sir!

ODog

seanwestref wrote
"Absolutely NO WAY"? How confident are you? Would you stake your life on it? Taking the (in my area) NFHS test is not that difficult. It is, after all, an open-book test. (yes I passed)

Are there any classroom sessions prior to the test date where an interpreter walks aspiring officials through the rules book or is it just show up with a book on test day and release for assignment anyone who passes?

Camron Rust

ODog wrote
Are there any classroom sessions prior to the test date where an interpreter walks aspiring officials through the rules book or is it just show up with a book on test day and release for assignment anyone who passes?

Why would that matter? I've been doing this 20 years and I dig into the rules deeper than most and I still find things that I didn't know occasionally.

For most rookies, they get a lot of stuff wrong even after they've heard it....it is overload. You can find a lot of stuff in the book as you need while taking the test but that doesn't mean they're remember it all on demand.

ODog

Camron Rust wrote
Why would that matter?

Because classes make it significantly less likely you'll have a "certified" official calling 3 seconds on inbounds plays and during shot and rebound attempts. Just offering the exam without any contextual rules/floor training is irresponsible and unfair to local teams who use that pool of officials.

Three seconds is also probably the top myth debunked in a new officials class, the kind of "light bulb" information that makes you say to yourself, "Whoa. That's one to file away."

I know some of you think this is coming from some high-and-mighty douche, but trust me, I know I'm the donk who ruled "back of the backboard" on an inbounds pass that wound up on the court.

I just find it scary and borderline reckless that someone who actually has a rules book, passed a test and is doing games isn't familiar with the 3-second rule -- at all.

That's why I found the whole thread fishy and perhaps a "chain yank" that had gone on too long (insert Manti Te'o joke here).

Once again, I was wrong. So now I'm just curious if classes are available to aspiring officials in seanwestref's area.

MD Longhorn

seanwestref wrote
Right, but as bob jenkins suggested, perhaps give some leeway during an interrupted dribble? I can see team A having a frontcourt baseline throw-in, player A1 being in the lane for two seconds before the ball is passed inbounds, and then remaining for one second after the ball is inbounds. In such a case I could call three seconds,

If you did, you'd be wrong.

just another ref

ODog wrote
Three seconds is also probably the top myth debunked in a new officials class, the kind of "light bulb" information that makes you say to yourself, "Whoa. That's one to file away."

Curious as to the specifics of the "myth" as taught in your class.

ODog

just another ref wrote
Curious as to the specifics of the "myth" as taught in your class.

As you know all too well from the jackals in the stands, it seems a large number of people think a three-second violation is for standing in the lane for 3 seconds, without regard to the location of the ball or who has control of it.

And even when you finally explain it to "that coach" who just decides to yell "three seconds" indiscriminately, you tend to get the "OK, I didn't realilze that. Thank you."

And now we know even working officials who have passed a test also subscribe to the myth.

« Previous Page Next Page »