HS end game events

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I can see your point except for the word "specifically". The rule (10-4-5 A player shall not: Delay the game by acts such as: a. Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play) is a general rule, and may not apply to this situation since there is another rule, a casebook play, and an annual interpretation, that cover this specific situation, in a contradictory manner.

It is my contention that 10-4-5 covers situations like further delays after the resumption of play rule is put into effect, or when an immediate technical foul is warranted after a delay, free thrower refusing to move into semicircle, not after a timeout; or player intercepting the bounced ball from the lead official to the free thrower to request a timeout.

I have offered, on numerous occasions, a rule, a casebook play, and an annual interpretation, that specifically cover this situation, that we warn first when a player delays the game by interfering with the ball, by slapping it away, following a goal. These three citations can't be more specific, can't be more clear, and shouldn't be ignored, we warn first.

According to these three citations, it doesn't matter whether the player slaps the ball five feet, or fifty feet, we warn first (for delay of game), and if the team does it again we follow up with a team technical foul (for delay of game).

I would love to give an immediate technical foul to the player who slaps the ball into the twelfth row in the bleachers, but I have three citations regarding this specific situation that tell me to warn first.

All good, except your case actually isn't specific since it doesn't clarify the difference between delay and prevent. You just have another general case. At some point, the action moves from a delay to a prevention. I suggest that if a player has to leave the court to retrieve the ball, they have prevented the ball from promptly becoming live. I'd also suggest that it also the case if they throw it into the other end of the court. However, if they knock it 2-3 feet, is is merely a delay.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I suggest that if a player has to leave the court to retrieve the ball, they have prevented the ball from promptly becoming live.

Intent to delay. Intent to prevent. Intent to stop the clock. A few feet. Several feet. All the way to the moon.

All perfectly valid points.

I believe that the NFHS needs to clarify what penalties should be charged when a team, or a player on that team, interferes with the ball following a goal.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Intent to delay. Intent to prevent. Intent to stop the clock. A few feet. Several feet. All the way to the moon.

All perfectly valid points.

I believe that the NFHS needs to clarify what penalties should be charged when a team, or a player on that team, interferes with the ball following a goal.

I think common sense needs to be imparted into the decision making progress. There is a difference between delaying a team that is actively attempting to make a throw-in (10-1-5), and preventing the ball from becoming live (10-4-5) by throwing/tapping it to some other part of the gym.

I know one aspect of 10-1-5 that you fail to grasp is that is not automatically a delay if the scoring team taps the ball after a made basket. If the opponent is not attempting to get the ball, they have not been delayed from doing anything.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... one aspect of 10-1-5 that you fail to grasp is that is not automatically a delay if the scoring team taps the ball after a made basket. If the opponent is not attempting to get the ball, they have not been delayed from doing anything.

Now why would you think that? I never said that, and strongly disagree that any tap, tip, touch, etc., is an "automatic delay" that deserves a whistle, a warning, or a technical foul. Sometimes it's just play on. And sometimes the ball gets accidentally kicked as a player turns to go the other way, and the ball can go pretty far, but still no "automatic delay", maybe a whistle to get the ball out from under the bleachers, and then administer a run the endline throwin, but no warning, or technical foul here either.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Sometimes the ball hits, and deflects, off a player as the ball comes through the net.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

If there's no illegal advantage, like the ball bouncing of a player's shoulder after passing through the net, then we don't sound the whistle.

[BryanV21]

"slapping it away"

What about grabbing the ball and throwing it? What about kicking the ball away? If we want to get specific about what the rule says, then the rule says "slapping" the ball away is an example of a delay that warrants a warning.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

... the rule says "slapping" the ball away is an example of a delay that warrants a warning.

Actually, a casebook play states that slapping the ball away is a delay that warrants a warning. The rule states that interfering with the ball following a goal warrants a warning, or if already warned, a team technical foul.

Grabbing, throwing, kicking, and slapping can all be examples of interfering with the ball following a goal.

Granted, maybe these examples should not all warrant the same penalty, but, as the rule now stands, it's clear how officials should react to such activity that interferes with the ball following a goal, a warning, or if already warned, a team technical foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Actually, a casebook play states that slapping the ball away is a delay that warrants a warning. The rule states that interfering with the ball following a goal warrants a warning, or if already warned, a team technical foul.

Grabbing, throwing, kicking, and slapping can all be examples of interfering with the ball following a goal.

Granted, maybe these examples should not all warrant the same penalty, but, as the rule now stands, it's clear how officials should react to such activity that interferes with the ball following a goal, a warning, or if already warned, a team technical foul.

10-4-5 is also clear about "preventing" the ball from becoming live. I don't know why you think your citation trumps 10-4-5.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Now why would you think that? I never said that, and strongly disagree that any tap, tip, touch, etc., is an "automatic delay" that deserves a whistle, a warning, or a technical foul. Sometimes it's just play on. And sometimes the ball gets accidentally kicked as a player turns to go the other way, and the ball can go pretty far, but still no "automatic delay", maybe a whistle to get the ball out from under the bleachers, and then administer a run the endline throwin, but no warning, or technical foul here either.

All your examples involve accidental touching or deflection. The deflection could be purposeful, or the scoring team can grab the ball and throw it to the official. If the throw-in team is not in the vicinity, there is no delay.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

The deflection could be purposeful, or the scoring team can grab the ball and throw it to the official. If the throw-in team is not in the vicinity, there is no delay.

Agreed. Sometimes the scoring team has the ball drop right in their lap, and rather than just leave it there for somebody to trip on, they intentionally try to put it in an easy position for the inbounding team to pick up. If this is the scenario, even though there was intent, there was no delay, so no penalty.

I'm not a big fan of the ball being tipped to an official. I usually just try to get out of the way, or if that isn't possible, I just leave the ball in place, or maybe, tip it to an inbounding player. If the team keeps doing that, I may give them an "unofficial oral warning", like, "Please stop tipping the ball to an official after a basket". If they keep doing that after my "unofficial oral warning", I may move on to a real written warning. Like I said, I'm not a big fan of players tipping the ball to officials after a score. But that's probably just me.