9-9....?

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Looks like it to me. She caught ball in air while jumping from FC. That gives her FC status. Lands in back court. Violation. The exception doesnt apply to her as it was already touched by other player. I wouldnt lose ANY sleep over not calling it as it happened quick etc. it was a BC violation though.

I'm not going to argue with either side of the argument. You can't really get this one wrong...............unless you really want to get technical and really look at it.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by SD Referee

I'm not going to argue with either side of the argument. You can't really get this one wrong...............unless you really want to get technical and really look at it.

There is nothing more technical than by rule this is a BC violation. In reality it won't and shouldn't get called.

[jTheUmp]

There's also the question of which official would even get a good look at it.

R (or the tossing official) is in the best position, but probably won't be looking over there until players clear the jump circle.

In a 3-person game, neither of the umpires is going to be in a good position to see it... U1 might have a chance.

In a 2-person game, the U would probably get a look (assuming she hasn't moved off the division line yet).

Personally, I'm no-calling this, but I'm also not going to attempt to overrule a partner if they call it.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by deecee

There is nothing more technical than by rule this is a BC violation. In reality it won't and shouldn't get called.

In reality, it may get missed, but SHOULD get called. It's illegal. It's that simple.

I agree with the poster who stated that a 2-person crew is actually better positioned to make this call than a 3-person crew.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Correct answer and correct reasons.

I agree 100%.

Do you really want to start a game by calling this? I don't want to be that guy.

Is not calling it technically wrong? I suppose so, but I'm not calling it. Play on and let's get the game going.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by deecee

There is nothing more technical than by rule this is a BC violation. In reality it won't and shouldn't get called.

100% correct. Don't be the guy that wants to show how great he knows the rules and call this. Play on!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

In reality, it may get missed, but SHOULD get called. It's illegal. It's that simple.

I agree with the poster who stated that a 2-person crew is actually better positioned to make this call than a 3-person crew.

If I see this, I'm 99% sure I'd call it. I'm not convinced I'd see it, though.

I'm not sure a crew of 2 is going to see this significantly better, since the U is going to be on the opposite side of the court looking through the jumpers. If U can see it, though, it's going to be with the perfect line of sight (as opposed to trying to call this from the FT line extended.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by deecee

There is nothing more technical than by rule this is a BC violation. In reality it won't and shouldn't get called.

Why shouldn't it get called if it's witnessed by an official who knows the rules and knows it's a violation?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Why shouldn't it get called if it's witnessed by an official who knows the rules and knows it's a violation?

So you call a 3 second violation as soon as you hit a 3 count?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Adam

If I see this, I'm 99% sure I'd call it. I'm not convinced I'd see it, though.

I'm not sure a crew of 2 is going to see this significantly better, since the U is going to be on the opposite side of the court looking through the jumpers. If U can see it, though, it's going to be with the perfect line of sight (as opposed to trying to call this from the FT line extended.

I think you are supposed to be at the 28' marks (or equivalent) -- and I think you'd be able to see it. Unlike SD Referee, I don't think this is "overly technical" or the wrong way to start the game.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think you are supposed to be at the 28' marks (or equivalent) -- and I think you'd be able to see it. Unlike SD Referee, I don't think this is "overly technical" or the wrong way to start the game.

Gee whiz, are you gonna call if it if a player barely steps on the sideline during the jump, too?

Seriously, I don't see why one wouldn't call this if one was sure -- but I certainly see how one might well not be sure, both because it happens quickly and because it isn't one of things one is thinking about during a jump. (And, I suppose, because there are so few jumps in the modern game that there aren't a lot of chances to see the weird stuff actually happen.)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

because it isn't one of things one is thinking about during a jump.

(Camp speak warning): We need to be ready to officiate from the very beginning.

[deecee]

This will be my last foray into this topic. Those on the "if I see it I must call it" do you warn and or T a coach when they step out of the coaching box?

Do you call 3 seconds at 3 and 10 second FT at 10?

The reality of this play is that it's not getting called. It's so close do you really want to start the game with this hair to split? I'm not calling the play that is in this video a BC violation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by deecee

This will be my last foray into this topic. Those on the "if I see it I must call it" do you warn and or T a coach when they step out of the coaching box?

Do you call 3 seconds at 3 and 10 second FT at 10?

The reality of this play is that it's not getting called. It's so close do you really want to start the game with this hair to split? I'm not calling the play that is in this video a BC violation.

Boundary lines defining the play of the game are not subject to gray area decisions with regards to whether the player is or is not in/out of a certain area. If you know the player was in the frontcourt (and it is possible you may not) with the ball and stepped into the backcourt (or OOB), there really isn't a choice to be made. There is no wiggle room within this rule for an exception because it was close or at the beginning of the game.

With regards to the time-based examples you give, the time itself is somewhat subjective and both of those rules have had plenty of press on what they were really intended to address and it isn't just the location or even the time. Both are targeted at unfair advantages (big man under the basket) or borderline unsportsmanlike behavior or unreasonably delaying the game (refusing to shoot a FT).

As for the T on the coach, no. Same reason, not how it was intended to be handled.

Personally, I don't shy away form calling something because it is close, I call things because they're the right thing to call. We're paid to split those hairs and not calling it is merely splitting the hair the other way.

[SD Referee]

Originally Posted by SC Official

Why shouldn't it get called if it's witnessed by an official who knows the rules and knows it's a violation?

Because, in my opinion, it's a ticky tack thing to call one second into the game. It has little to no impact on the game other than an official trying to show how smart he is.

I doubt any coach would know it was a violation and I doubt anybody in the crowd would either. Do we really want to blow the whistle one second into the game for this? I don't.