VIDEO REQUEST - North Florida vs FGCU

[chapmaja]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

I had this play earlier in the season in a wRECk league game (NFHS rules). Team A makes a basket to take a 1 point lead with under 10 seconds left. A1 intentionally knocks the ball away from the court and into the hallway (door has to be kept open during games). This was clearly designed to prevent the ball from becoming live immediately and allowing the defense to get set up before Team B had a chance to inbound the ball.

My partner, who was the new trail, wanted to only give a delay warning. I insisted it should have been a technical foul for unsportsmanlike conduct because it was a clearly intentional act of changing direction and reaching out to strike the ball.

We eventually went with the unsportsmanlike tech call, and the guys proceeds to miss the two free throws, and then commits a 5 second violation on the inbound pass after the free throws.

Ok guys, you are correct that I made the incorrect call, but not for the reasons you seem to think you are.

If you refer back to the casebook a few years ago, there actually was a play in which the comments discussed this situation.

2011-2012 Casebook play 9-2-10 Situation A on page 74.

The initial play discussed the ball being knocked out of the inbounders hand. This we can all agree should be called, and a warning for delay issued.

The key part of the situation is the last part.

In situations where the clock is running and 5 or less seconds remain in the game, the throw in plane violation or interference with the ball should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. "However if the tactic in any way interferes with the throwers efforts to make a throw in, a technical foul SHALL BE CALLED even though no previous warning had been issued. In this case, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic.

The only reason my ruling was incorrect was because there were under 10 seconds, not under 5 seconds.

This comment seems very clear that if a team intentionally commits a delay violation in order to benefit themselves late in the game, a technical foul SHALL be called even if the warning had not been issued.

This comment does seem inconsistent with all of the rules referenced, and includes references to all of the rules which indicate a team delay shall be issued first, so I do understand where you guys are stating I am incorrect, but

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

The only reason my ruling was incorrect was because there were under 10 seconds, not under 5 seconds.

I think you are reading more into that than is there. What you are quoting is a provision that says, essentially, if the clock is going to expire anyway, and the team that is behind commits a delay of game violation, just let the clock expire -- unless it is so bad you can't ignore it, in which case you jump over a warning to a T, as the warning would benefit that team and give them a chance to intercept the inbound pass.

But that was not your situation: the team that was ahead was the one that committed the delay. Stopping the clock wit a DOG allows the other team to inbound.

I don't think this play supports your T at all, even if there had been fewer than 5 seconds left.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I think you are reading more into that than is there. What you are quoting is a provision that says, essentially, if the clock is going to expire anyway, and the team that is behind commits a delay of game violation, just let the clock expire -- unless it is so bad you can't ignore it, in which case you jump over a warning to a T, as the warning would benefit that team and give them a chance to intercept the inbound pass.

But that was not your situation: the team that was ahead was the one that committed the delay. Stopping the clock wit a DOG allows the other team to inbound.

I don't think this play supports your T at all, even if there had been fewer than 5 seconds left.

Werd!

[Rich]

Originally Posted by adam

werd!

+1

[Adam]

Originally Posted by chapmaja

This comment does seem inconsistent with all of the rules referenced, and includes references to all of the rules which indicate a team delay shall be issued first, so I do understand where you guys are stating I am incorrect, but

The comment is for a very specific play, especially given the other case play mentioned and it's comments. Be careful about applying the case play for an extremely narrow scenario. You absolutely cannot divorce the comment you highlighted in red from the words immediately preceding the word "however": "In situations where the clock is running and 5 or less seconds remain in the game, the throw in plane violation or interference with the ball should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock."

A plain reading should lead you to conclude that the portion you highlighted, like the instructions to ignore, are ONLY applicable in this specific situation (trailing team trying to stop the clock with less than 5 seconds left.)