Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1013037)

I would assume that there are players on the FT lane just like any FT. So if players rush the court just after an FT with time on it, why would you not give a T for players rushing the court? They basically interrupted play at that time.

Peace

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1013041)

The OP says the clock read zeroes when the players rushed the court. They did not rush the court with time on the clock.

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1013041)

The way I see it the players rushed the court due to the timer's error of starting the clock and it hitting zeroes. I don't think it's their job to go "wait, the clock shouldn't have started, so we shouldn't rush the court to celebrate."

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1013041)

I'm going to handle it like hilltoppanther said he would, except for making sure the coaches understand the clock shouldn't have started when it did along with the clock operator.

BTW, I'm assuming there was .3 seconds on the clock after Team B made 1 of 2 FTs, but they didn't make a basket when they tried inbounding the ball and making a quick basket.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 1013043)

Unless there was an obvious timing error, the officials should not have put the .3 on the clock

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1013042)

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

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1013048)

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

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1013049)

You must know the rules in order to bend them. I can see a supervisor saying, "They should know the rule." Because if you do not give a T in this situation, then the other coach has a legitimate beef. Players and coaches have to know better about when the game is over. So they never rush the court there is no issue.

Peace

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1013053)

But I can tell the coach or assigner that the players reacted to the timer's mistake, and weren't entirely at fault.

Should they know better, like you said? Yes.

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 1013054)

The question I have mostly, did they come out when the horn was clearly sounded, or did they come off the bench before the game was clearly over? If the latter is the case, I am OK with a T. But this is a HTBT situation.

Peace