Oklahoma State Vs. Iowa State Video

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

His head was not in the cylinder.

BI for touching the basket while the ball is on or in the basket.

Or for touching the ball while it was on or in the basket.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Or for touching the ball while it was on or in the basket.

Which means it should also be basket interference when a player dunks and the ball hits off his own head and goes back up through the ring.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Which means it should also be basket interference when a player dunks and the ball hits off his own head and goes back up through the ring.

Would this not fall under the exception in Section 6? The rules don't specifically address this exact scenario as far as I can tell, but I could argue that the spirit and intent of the rule is that the occasional situation that the ball touches the player's head before passing completely through the basket on a dunk is not basket interference.

Also, why would "going back up through the ring" have any impact? If you are calling offensive basket interference, would it not be for the player touching the ball the ball is on or within either basket?


EXCEPTION: In Arts. 1 or 2, if a player has his/her hand legally in contact with the ball, it is
not a violation if such contact with the ball continues after it enters a basket cylinder or if in such
action, the player touches the basket. Dunking or stuffing is legal and is not basket interference.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

Also, why would "going back up through the ring" have any impact? If you are calling offensive basket interference, would it not be for the player touching the ball the ball is on or within either basket?

I say going back through the ring b/c that's what happens when a player dunks on his own head. No one pays attention otherwise. We've seen plenty of videos over the years where a player dunks and hits his own head the ball comes back up through the hoop.

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

Would this not fall under the exception in Section 6? The rules don't specifically address this exact scenario as far as I can tell, but I could argue that the spirit and intent of the rule is that the occasional situation that the ball touches the player's head before passing completely through the basket on a dunk is not basket interference.

EXCEPTION: In Arts. 1 or 2, if a player has his/her hand legally in contact with the ball, it is
not a violation if such contact with the ball continues after it enters a basket cylinder or if in such
action, the player touches the basket. Dunking or stuffing is legal and is not basket interference.

Since players don't dunk with their heads, I don't think the exception applies. The exception is to allow a player to put his hand(s) in and contact the basket when he dunks.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I say going back through the ring b/c that's what happens when a player dunks on his own head. No one pays attention otherwise. We've seen plenty of videos over the years where a player dunks and hits his own head the ball comes back up through the hoop.

Since players don't dunk with their heads, I don't think the exception applies. The exception is to allow a player to put his hand(s) in and contact the basket when he dunks.

I guess I'm having a hard time figuring out why this would be an automatic call only if the ball bounced back up through. If you don't consider this one of the dunking exceptions, then I can think of 3 scenarios:

1) The player's head touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket, and then the ball eventually passes through the basket

2) The player's head touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket, and then the ball eventually bounces back up and out.


3) After the ball passes through the basket, the ball hits the player's head and bounces up through the basket.

It seems to me that you are saying that 1 and 3 would be offensive BI but 2 would be a good goal. Without any case play to say otherwise, the rule to me (assuming you don't consider this a dunking exception) is that both 1 and 2 would be offensive BI and 3 would be a good goal.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by HokiePaul

I guess I'm having a hard time figuring out why this would be an automatic call only if the ball bounced back up through. If you don't consider this one of the dunking exceptions, then I can think of 3 scenarios:

1) The player's head touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket, and then the ball eventually passes through the basket

2) The player's head touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket, and then the ball eventually bounces back up and out.


3) After the ball passes through the basket, the ball hits the player's head and bounces up through the basket.

It seems to me that you are saying that 1 and 3 would be offensive BI but 2 would be a good goal. Without any case play to say otherwise, the rule to me (assuming you don't consider this a dunking exception) is that both 1 and 2 would be offensive BI and 3 would be a good goal.

I gave an example of a play that should be ruled offensive BI but ends up being a play-on. All the other stuff your talking about never entered my head. "Automatic" and "only" were not even in my posts. Not sure what your point is based on my original post as it pertains to the video that was posted.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Not my video but I will but this is so we can all see this on the site.



Peace

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Which means it should also be basket interference when a player dunks and the ball hits off his own head and goes back up through the ring.

[HokiePaul]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

I gave an example of a play that should be ruled offensive BI but ends up being a play-on. All the other stuff your talking about never entered my head. "Automatic" and "only" were not even in my posts. Not sure what your point is based on my original post as it pertains to the video that was posted.

Thanks for clarifying. The video is clearly defensive BI that was missed.

I was just trying to understand your statement that if them ball hit the offensive players head and went back through, it was offensive BI. It didn't seem that simple to me since what the ball does after contacting a player doesn't have anything to do with the BI call (the ball is dead upon contact). But I understand your point that if the ball goes through the basket, it's not going to be called BI even if it technically is.

With replay being used more now though (and I have no idea what triggers replays), I was curious to understand the rule and if there were case plays on this.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Which means it should also be basket interference when a player dunks and the ball hits off his own head and goes back up through the ring.

It is.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Which means it should also be basket interference when a player dunks and the ball hits off his own head and goes back up through the ring.

Yep.

[BryanV21]

Just a note on this...

Since this is a missed violation call this would not fall under the CE for erroneously cancelling a score.

Correct?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Just a note on this...

Since this is a missed violation call this would not fall under the CE for erroneously cancelling a score.

Correct?

No. Missed calls are not correctable errors, even if they involve scoring.

For this to be a CE, they would have had to actually call BI but fail to award the points (since it was a defensive violation)

[JRutledge]

Peace