Quote:
Originally posted by MattRef
I have a couple of questions about a couple of cases in the case book, so get your copy out and help me out.
My first question concerns 3.2.2F on page 15. Allow me to quote the text:
"Team A takes a time-out following about two minutes of pla in the first quarter. the scorer signals the referee to the table for a discussion. The scorer indicates that although team A No. 32 was a designated starter, No. 34 stated instead and is still i the game."
According to the book, there is no penalty for changing a starter after play has begun, quoting 10.1.2a and 3.2.2a. But in neither of these rules does it differentiate between when play has started or not. In act, in a previous case (3.2.2C), they still penalize for adding a player to the score book after he has played for an undetermined length of time. Can someone explain this apparent discrepancy? I am a bit confused.
|
No wonder you're confused. You're question is confusing! :^)
If a coach changes starters prior to the game, it must be recognized before the ball becomes live to start the game. it doesn't matter if that's by a a jump ball or a FT.
When a player is not in the scorebook, a technical foul is assessed when his name is added to the book, not necessarily when he plays. If the coach walks up at the end of the first quarter and says "#12 just arrived. I want his name put in the book." We now have a technical foul. But the scorer must notify an official before the ball becomes live to start the 2nd quarter. Different scenario - If #12 came into the game and the scorer discovered his name was not in the book, she would notify an official, put his name in the book, and the T would be assessed then. So either way, the T is assessed when the player is addedd to the squad list.
[/QUOTE]My second question deals with case 4.15.4C(c). here is the text:
"After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (c) against his/her own backboard, catches the rebound and dribbles again."
In (a) and (b), A1 throws the ball against the official or against the opponent's backboard, both constituting a double dribble. But in (c), it isn't a double dribble. Someone please explain the difference in dribbling it against your own backboard vs. against the opponent's backboard? In the ruling, they state; "in (c), the action is legal as a player's own backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds, but does not constitute a part of a dribble."
If I understand it correctly, if it is treated as a part of the floor inbounds, it should be a double dribble because A1's initial dribble had ended, and he attempted to resume it. [/QUOTE]
But Matt, you just read the rule. The rule says it is the the same as touching the floor inbounds,
except that when the ball touches the thrower's backboard it does not constitute a part of a dribble. The rule says it's not the same as a dribble, so it can't be a double dribble. Would it be any different if the ball hit the rim, even though it wasn't a try? No, it wouldn't.
Throwing the ball against your opponenet's backboard - How about a player who has picked up his dribble in the BC? If not for this restriction, he could legally throw the ball against the backboard and start another dribble.
I believe the purpose of the exception is so that officials would not have to make a judgment as to whether the ball hitting the backboard is a shot or not. That's reserved for airballs.
When you see this, just think of the airball rule. It's not traveling to catch an airball and it's not a double dribble if the ball hits his backboard.