H.S. Slapping backboard GT
 

I'm a high school official 99% of the time right now, but have an occasional game with NCAA rules.
Working with two excellent officials that work 60/40 H.S. & NCAA.
4th quarter of a game with decent flow and I'm C on a secondary break.
A2 goes in for a layup and B4 misses the block and slaps the backboard so hard that the rims shakes and layup rolls out. I got nothing, but can feel the crowd's disapproval... My trail official comes flying in and is counting the bucket for a goal-tending violation.
My immediate instinct was: Crap - that's wrong and I need to go correct him...
My words would have been: "We either have to get a technical foul on this play or take back the goal tending?". I'm confident that the trail official was confident that he was right... so I did nothing and figured I'd settle it at the next timeout or post-game.
Next timeout; I tell both of them: "In H.S. that is a T or nothing." They both have a mixed look of: are you sure/I think you're right/oh crap.
BTW: I knew I was 100% right on this one and I showed them 10-4-4 post-game and we had no argument... these are excellent officials!
Q: Did I handle this correctly or should I have gone over and corrected my partner without him asking me for help?

I have no issues with what you did.

Peace

At the very least, I think it's worth the discussion. To me I would handle it just like a ball I saw tipped that my partner sends the other way. I'm going to come in and provide him information, and allow him to change or keep his call from there. That said, I also let him know pregame and on the spot that I'm only coming in if I'm 1000% sure.

+1.

BTW, it would be BI if anything, not GT. But that's in college, not in HS.

Every HS fan and coach in America thinks this is BI (they'll call it GT but we know what they mean). And they're all wrong.

I wouldn't mind NFHS coming in line with NCAA on this rule, but I don't think it will happen. Most HS backboards are non-portable, so a good slap of the board doesn't really move the rim around all that much.

From The List ...
 

The backboard has nothing to do with goaltending. Goaltending is when a player touches the ball during a try, or tap, while it is in its downward flight, entirely above the basket ring level, outside the imaginary cylinder above the ring, and has the possibility of entering the basket. On most layups, the ball is going up immediately after it contacts the backboard. It is legal to pin the ball against the backboard if it still on the way up, and is not in the imaginary cylinder above the basket. Slapping the backboard is neither basket interference, nor is it goaltending, and points cannot be awarded. A player who strikes a backboard, during a tap, or a try, so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul. When a player simply attempts to block a shot, and accidentally slaps the backboard, it is neither a violation, nor is it a technical foul

You allowed your crew to kick a rule and award unmerited points to a team. Yes, you should have handled it differently.
You should have held up the resumption of the game following your partner's incorrect ruling and had a conversation right then. He obviously applied the NCAA ruling and the mistake should have been fixed.
This wasn't a situation in which you were uncertain of the NFHS rule or what your partner saw on the play. As the C, you had a great look and you had the proper rules knowledge that the crew needed. You should have spoken up.

NCAA officials, if they are going to accept NFHS games, need to-- at the very least -- review pp.75-77 of the rules book delineating the differences between the two rule sets. Partner last week-- and I like him dearly as a friend and a crewmate -- was surprised I called a violation for a player intentionally going OOB and delaying before return inbounds, then called a violation on a player who he determined was first to touch after going OOB and then returning inbounds.
I say, "If they are going to accept NFHS games." They really don't have to. And if they determine not to call the game according to the approved rules set, it's better for the crew and the game if they not officiate high school games.
Comply or deny. Comply with the prevailing rules set, or deny the opportunity to officiate the game.
Simple.

How are you going to make them change something either you did not see or they made a ruling on? When you discussed it with them, that is all you can do. If they are not convinced they are wrong, you cannot make them change the call. And that is certainly the case if they did not see the play in question.

All you can do in the end is show them how wrong they are and they should learn from the situation. But you cannot make them change the call without blatantly overruling them which you advocate is not our job to do.

Peace

You can't go in and overrule your partner(s) but you should offer information in this situation so that it still can be corrected. Talking about it after is good for future reference but doesn't help anything going forward - and it reinforces a rule misconception with those teams that may need to be dealt with down the road. That's a secondary concern but still worth mentioning.

If you talk to him and he is convinced he is right (for whatever reason), then what? You cannot do anything but give information and that is if you know why they made a call. It is no different than a block-charge call where you might pass on the play because you have almost no-contact and your partner calls a foul. Are you going to give your partner information at that time? And if you do what if they are convinced they are right? Mentioning my be one thing, but they are going to have to live with some calls. Unless the call is to save the game (which I do not see in this), then we could be "mentioning" a lot to partners potentially.

Peace

Nothing, of course. Which is exactly what I said.

Judgment vs rules misapplication. Apples and moonrocks.

A block-charge call can be a misapplication of the rules and a misjudgment at the very same time. Just like an out of bounds play can be as well. It just depends on what happens and often you are not going to really know why some situations are missed unless you ask.

Better yet, with this rule you could also misapply the rule. The NCAA rule says if the ball hits the backboard and is touched off the backboard, it is goaltending. That very same play in a high school game might be a GT and might not be. So when an officials calls a GT in high school, are they making it because it applied all the way to the high school rule or are they using the college rule? You would not know unless the ball is grossly below the rim and even then, they might have felt the ball was touched where it would be illegal.

Peace

Not in the example you cited. And in reality, it's meaningless. I'm not proffering a one size fits all solution to everything we don't agree with being called by a partner. Ergo my statement "...in this situation."

I'm responding to the OP, which is very clearly a misapplication of the rules. We can run this to the ridiculous conclusion if we must but let's keep it focused on BI/GT and slapping the backboard.

There is absolutely no element of this play, as described, that is subject to judgment.

One: I think you should have approached him just to remind him. I've done this on a BC violation call on a throw-in. My partner had that same look as I approached him and he reversed it on his own after a quick chat.

Two: Even if you call the T, it's still not GT.

He said slapping the backboard so hard that the ball feel off, but that might not have been the actual reason the call was made in the first place (talking about when it was called). He assumed that was the case and there still could be an element of the ball being touched or he felt the ball was touched. Not everything in this play is mutually exclusive. And again, not the point. Because if he disagrees with the call, he can mention it all he wants and his partner could have given him a reason he was not aware of as a violation.

Peace