Another suspension looming?

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by johnny d

Interesting philosophy. I hope it serves you well. Luckily for the officials on the game in the OP, they didn't need to employ this tactic, all they needed was some rules knowledge to realize a technical foul wasn't warranted in their situation because the celebration did not interfere with the other teams ability to start the next play/inbound the ball.

Well, that was a rare time in which I had to skirt the rules. In fact, I can't think of another time I had to do such a thing. Maybe I should not do that at all, but I hear many officials (both here and elsewhere) talk about the keeping in the spirit of the game, which I take as making the game as fair as possible for both teams. As long as there's something in the rule book to back me up in doing so, I'm going to go with it.

I'd like to hear other's thoughts on this. If I should have allowed the wrong team to inbound the ball, I'll just deal with the repercussions.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

If I'm going to make a call like this, I'm going to first make sure I absolutely have to.

I mean, if there's a loophole in the rules that allows me to avoid having to make such a call, I'm going to use it. Strictly speaking, it may not be right, but I want to stay within the spirit of the game.

For example, in a game earlier this season, my partner allowed the wrong team to inbound the ball. Right after the inbounder threw the ball in I blew my whistle to correct the call.

Now, yes... I should have seen the error right away and corrected it. And yes, once the ball is inbounded it's too late. However, like I told my partners at the time, I "recognized the error before the ball was released by the inbounder and simply didn't hit my whistle soon enough" (note the quotation marks).

It was a stupid error by us officials, and if I could help it I wanted to avoid that mistake giving either team an unfair advantage.

As I read this, you have rule support to correct it. It's too late once the throw-in is touched -- not when the pass is released.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

As I read this, you have rule support to correct it. It's too late once the throw-in is touched -- not when the pass is released.

Duh. When the throw- in ends. Not sure why I thought otherwise. I guess it's the self-deprecating part of myself that assumes I messed up.

[JRutledge]

I am not seeing anything that suggests a T was not warranted other than overall opinion and philosophy. The AR says you can give a T.

And this is a college game where the supervisor might have informed them how to handle this situation. Unless we know, we are assuming a lot here.

Peace

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I am not seeing anything that suggests a T was not warranted other than overall opinion and philosophy. The AR says you can give a T.

And this is a college game where the supervisor might have informed them how to handle this situation. Unless we know, we are assuming a lot here.

Peace

Perhaps that was a typo, but that part where you said "can" is the whole issue being discussed.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Perhaps that was a typo, but that part where you said "can" is the whole issue being discussed.

An administrative technical foul shall be assessed to the offending team. This administrative technical foul does not apply to the team foul total. Any player from Team B shall attempt the two free throws and play shall resume at the point of interruption. When the celebration does not delay or interfere with play, the celebration shall be ignored.

It says if you deem the throw-in is not interfered with. I think that could be in question. I would try my best to never call this, but what were the officials told about this situation by their supervisor or the conference? Do w know if something similar took place before? There is a possibility the conference had a philosophy about these situations. And I am not seeing anything that says they are totally wrong other than what people feel about the situation.

Peace

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It says if you deem the throw-in is not interfered with. I think that could be in question. I would try my best to never call this, but what were the officials told about this situation? There is a possibility the conference had a philosophy about these situations.

Peace

You're right. Those officials may have had no choice but to call this. And hell, I'm not even a collegiate official. I just thought it was an interesting situation, and was curious what others (especially at the hs level) thought.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

You're right. Those officials may have had no choice but to call this. And hell, I'm not even a collegiate official. I just thought it was an interesting situation, and was curious what others (especially at the hs level) thought.

I am saying this not seeing the team with the throw-in even trying to put the ball back in play. They seem to accept the game is over, but the fact remains, if the team does not come onto the court, they might have tried to throw-in the ball. Again, I have been in enough meeting where the staff was told, "You are going to enforce this rule....." only to feel like "I hope this never happens in our game."

The OP suggests the officials were totally wrong here and it might have been a directive from higher ups about what should be done. It is possible IMO than they were doing what had previously been addressed.

Peace

[Rich]

They had to go to the monitor to put time back on the clock. Are you missing that part? The timer mistakenly allowed the clock to expire on the made shot.

The officials were totally wrong here.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

They had to go to the monitor to put time back on the clock. Are you missing that part? The timer mistakenly allowed the clock to expire on the made shot.

The officials were totally wrong here.

Yes and it does not say that going to the monitor is a factor. The rule says nothing about that part, just states that the rules are unclear as to what is "interfering."

Peace

[Rich]

The clock expired. How can a throw-in be interfered with?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

The clock expired. How can a throw-in be interfered with?

Easy if the philosophy is that the teams and fans cannot come onto the court until the game is ruled over. Again, this might have been addressed in previous meetings or years and the conference and their supervisor wanted it addressed. You say they are totally wrong, but what if nothing is done to the officials or the call is supported by the league? This is college, not a high school game. There are a lot of rules or memos sent during the year that influence rulings. That is really all I am saying. I am not reading anything you posted that says they were wrong or right, just stating there needs to be more information to know if they did not follow the proper procedure.

Peace

[Rich]

4 games, no postseason.

http://www.kttc.com/story/30929559/n...medium=twitter

[JRutledge]

Now we know.

Peace

[Rich]

I figured instead of arguing with you I'd use the Google. Figured something would be released by now.