Warning for Delay?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by rbruno

Team A scores to pull within 2 points of Team B with 13 seconds left and the clock running. After the score A-1 knocks the ball away and it rolls about 15 ft to a back wall of the gym. I held my whistle for delay as it seemed an unfair advantage for Team A to stop the clock to issue the warning. As I wait for Team B to go and get the ball, Coach of team A starts screaming for me to start my 5 sec count.... I blew the whistle and told coach A that his team knocked the ball away etc. Of course Team A steals the ensuing throw in and hits a three pointer at the buzzer to win the game. I know I probably shouldn't have blown the whistle here, but how would you guys have handled this end of game.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

By the rulebook. Whistle, stop clock. Delay warning for interfering with the ball after a made goal (technical foul if already warned for delay) written in scorebook. Team B gets a run the endline throwin.

You can't get into trouble if you go by the book.

10.1.5 SITUATION D: Immediately following a goal by A1, A3 slaps the ball
away so that Team B is unable to make a quick throw-in. RULING: The official
shall sound his/her whistle and go to the table to have the scorer record a team
warning for delay. The warning shall then be reported to the head coach of Team A.
Any subsequent delay by Team A shall result in a team technical foul charged
to Team A. (4-47-3)

Key here is thirteen seconds. Five seconds or less, I'm letting the clock run, as advised by a NFHS casebook play.

9.2.10 SITUATION A: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through
the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hands. Team B has not been
warned previously for a throw-in plane infraction. RULING: B1 is charged with a
technical foul and it also results in the official having a team warning recorded
and reported to the head coach. COMMENT: In situations with the clock running
and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering
with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the
clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower’s efforts to
make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous
warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock
and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic. (4-
47-1; 10-1-5b, c; 10-3-10)

I have never (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirley) been averse to issue a formal Scorebook Warning. But in the OP as described, I would have charged A1 with a TF for Delay of Game and issued a Scorebook Warning to Team A for a Delay of Game.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I would have charged A1 with a TF for Delay of Game and issued a Scorebook Warning to Team A for a Delay of Game.

The original post was, almost word for word, the same as 10.1.5 SITUATION D, which ends up with a delay of game warning. It's indisputable.

An immediate technical foul, without the benefit of a warning, would be for something like interfering with the thrower’s efforts to make a throw-in, like the defender reaching through the boundary plane and knocking the ball out of the inbounder's hands.

In one case the defender is interfering with the ball, in the other case the defender is interfering with the inbounder.

That's a big difference.

[deecee]

You should have called a delay of game warning (a T if one had been previously given) and given the offended team the ball back with the right to run the endline.

You compounded matters by (1) stopping to clock to "chat" with the coach. If you were to stop the clock at this point its to call a delay of game and/or a T (although I wouldn't call the T). Those are your only 2 options. There is no scenario to stop the clock to chat with a coach.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The original post was, almost word for word, the same as 10.1.5 SITUATION D, which ends up with a delay of game warning. It's indisputable.

An immediate technical foul, without the benefit of a warning, would be for something like interfering with the thrower’s efforts to make a throw-in, like the defender reaching through the boundary plane and knocking the ball out of the inbounder's hands.

In one case the defender is interfering with the ball, in the other case the defender is interfering with the inbounder. That's a big difference.

The key in my decision to issue a TF in OP is that the Ball was knocked 15 feet away from the End Line, meaning, to me, that the Ball was knocked quite a way from the Team who was entitled to make the Throw-in. If the ball had been knocked only a few feet I would only issued a Delay of Game Warning.

MTD, Sr.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The key in my decision to issue a TF in OP is that the Ball was knocked 15 feet away from the End Line, meaning, to me, that the Ball was knocked quite a way from the Team who was entitled to make the Throw-in. If the ball had been knocked only a few feet I would only issued a Delay of Game Warning.

MTD, Sr.

He knocked the ball away and it rolled 15 feet. What if it only rolled 13, would you still T? Hitting the ball 3 feet or 15 is the same act, just a different outcome. I don't think we should apply harsher penalties based on distance ball traveled here. Just my $.02.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by deecee

He knocked the ball away and it rolled 15 feet. What if it only rolled 13, would you still T? Hitting the ball 3 feet or 15 is the same act, just a different outcome. I don't think we should apply harsher penalties based on distance ball traveled here.

Hey. Along with an extra whistle, I've got a tape measure in my pocket, I know how to use it, and I'm not afraid to use it.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by deecee

I don't think we should apply harsher penalties based on distance ball traveled here.

Indeed, this has been discussed. Deecee's point is understood however, for me, distance traveled and method influence harshness of penalty. Lightly slapping the ball 3 feet away is much different than punting the ball 40 yards into the stands.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by bucky

Indeed, this has been discussed. Deecee's point is understood however, for me, distance traveled and method influence harshness of penalty. Lightly slapping the ball 3 feet away is much different than punting the ball 40 yards into the stands.

Lightly tapping versus punting are 2 different acts. The distance travelled is not what is penalized.

[Pantherdreams]

In regards to OP if team knocks ball away and causes a delay that is what I am calling. First time warning. Ensuing times respond accordingly.

This is not as complicated a decision in Feeble as clock is stopping on every made basket in last 2 min.

[bucky]

Originally Posted by deecee

Lightly tapping versus punting are 2 different acts. The distance travelled is not what is penalized.

All acts are different resulting in all distances being different. Distance appears to be main factor when adjudicating this type of case.