Referee mag question

[ronny mulkey]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

1) Yes -- there is TC -- it's right from the definitions. There is not PC -- also right from the definitions.

2) You are right to put the ball on the floor. There's a case in 9.2 (I think) that has this happen

Thanks. Used your previous post in my original discussion with him.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

Thanks. Used your previous post in my original discussion with him.

Some people think there needs to be PC to have (or to "begin") TC. While that's *usually* true, and is often stated as a short-cut to get people to understand the concept, it's not always true.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Some people think there needs to be PC to have (or to "begin") TC. While that's *usually* true, and is often stated as a short-cut to get people to understand the concept, it's not always true.

Prior to the rule change to have TC on a throwin, that was the case....team control only started (in the old rules) when player control was obtained. But of course, the TC rule on throwins, in addition to being mess up in other ways, messed up the simply concept of control.

The issue of how to handle fouls occurring during a throwin could have been so much more easily handled with a change to the foul rules than a change to the definition of team control.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Prior to the rule change to have TC on a throwin, that was the case....team control only started (in the old rules) when player control was obtained. But of course, the TC rule on throwins, in addition to being mess up in other ways, messed up the simply concept of control.

The issue of how to handle fouls occurring during a throwin could have been so much more easily handled with a change to the foul rules than a change to the definition of team control.

Agreed (as you know).

A PC foul can happen without PC, so why not just have a definition that allows a TC foul to happen without TC.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

There's a case in 9.2 that has this happen

9.2.9 SITUATION: Following a violation, the official has properly signaled and
awarded a throw-in to Team A at a designated spot. No Team A player comes to
the spot even though the official has allowed ample time for them to respond. The
official then places the ball on the floor and begins the five-second count. (a) Both
A1 and A2 step out of bounds and A1 picks up the ball; or (b) both A1 and A2
step out of bounds and A1 picks up the ball and hands it to A2. RULING: In (a),
A2 must immediately return inbounds. In (b), it is a throw-in violation when A1
hands the ball to A2.

[ronny mulkey]

[QUOTE=Camron Rust;992906]Prior to the rule change to have TC on a throwin, that was the case....team control only started (in the old rules) when player control was obtained.

But, the resumption of play procedure has been around for awhile???? So, that wasn't quite true even under the old rule???

They need to get rid of the resumption-of-play procedure. So dumb. Just give us the ability to call a delay of game.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Prior to the rule change to have TC on a throwin, that was the case....team control only started (in the old rules) when player control was obtained.

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

But, the resumption of play procedure has been around for awhile???? So, that wasn't quite true even under the old rule???

In what way? Placing the ball on the floor didn't start either team control or player control. It just made the ball at the disposal of the team.

(EDIT for clarity: UNDER THE OLD RULE)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If there's a foul and NO timeout, then it's an immediate T if the shooting team doesn't have the shooter ready, or the "defensive" team doesn't have two players in the lower spaces. This is NOT resumption of play. See 10.4.5

To start the half -- if the team is still in the locker room, count for a minute and then issue a T. If the team is at the bench, but doesn't come on the court, use ROP.

This is correct. Directly from the Case Book.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

While you do put the ball on the floor, this is NOT the ROP procedure.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I believe it is. It fits the definition precisely.

Camron is right. About five years ago the NFHS made an editorial change to include this action as part of the ROP procedure. Bob's thinking predates that change.

[ronny mulkey]

[QUOTE=Camron Rust;993001]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

In what way? Placing the ball on the floor didn't start either team control or player control. It just made the ball at the disposal of the team.

See 4.12.2.d. A team is control "when a player of the team has disposal of the ball for a throw in". Am I misinterpreting this? It seems clear to me.

[bob jenkins]

[QUOTE=ronny mulkey;993195]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

See 4.12.2.d. A team is control "when a player of the team has disposal of the ball for a throw in". Am I misinterpreting this? It seems clear to me.

That's true NOW. Camron was talking about the rule before the whole TC foul changes.

It USED to say something like, "TC begins when PC begins. PC begins when a player is holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds." (emphasis added) So, there was no PC or TC during a throw-in (or when the the ball was at the disposal).