Interpretation please...

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes, when the clock should not have run. Kind of basic here.



But players and coaches should also know better. The clock does not run out because a FT was made. Kind of basic stuff honestly.



That is fine, but they are not absolved from knowing the rules on this situation either. Not saying that is the only option, but the officials have the right to give a T in this situation.

I will give an example of something that actually happened to me.

I had a situation over 10 years ago where a quick steal and dunk with seconds that did not end the game had the team that took the lead rushed the court. The clock eventually ran out, but before the clock had run out the players were all over the court. We issued a technical foul to mainly one player that met his teammate at the lane after the dunk. This allowed the opponent to take two FTs which sent the game into overtime and the opponent actually won the game. The coach did not say a word to us or even protest. It was obvious what had happened.

So just to say, "the clock had zeros" is not enough for me when anyone that watches basketball knows the game does not end on a FT with time left in the game. That gave them an advantage to set up the defense for the other team and then win the game for sure.

My point is that this could be done either way and I would see both sides. But if someone is asking for an interpretation, then the ruling is a technical foul. What you do based on other considerations is up to you.

Peace

That's fine. You have rules to back you up in either situation. Maybe you had to be there.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk