Referee mag question

[ronny mulkey]

This post has cause a running discussion with a friend of mine where we questioned did placing the ball on the floor create player control or team control? We have been back and forth on this. But, it created another question in my mind on a practice I've done for years. For years I have always placed a ball on the floor in situations not resumption in nature (not following a TO or intermission). For example, I can't get Team A to come get the ball after a normal violation call on Team B, such as traveling. No matter what I did, I couldn't get a player over there. After some point, I placed the ball on the floor and began counting. Is this wrong?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

This post has cause a running discussion with a friend of mine where we questioned did placing the ball on the floor create player control or team control? We have been back and forth on this. But, it created another question in my mind on a practice I've done for years. For years I have always placed a ball on the floor in situations not resumption in nature (not following a TO or intermission). For example, I can't get Team A to come get the ball after a normal violation call on Team B, such as traveling. No matter what I did, I couldn't get a player over there. After some point, I placed the ball on the floor and began counting. Is this wrong?

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

[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.

[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)

[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.