When to Kill a Play for an Apparent Injury
 

A-1 goes down on an apparent non-serious injury (no head contact, etc.). Typically, if Team A is in control, I kill the play, but if Team B is in control, I prefer to hold my whistle and let it play out.

Had one today that was different: I'm the T. A-1 and B-2 both went down above the three-point line. My instinct told me to hold my whistle, as A-3 was driving the lane. The L wound up calling a common foul against B-4 a few seconds later, and I immediately beckoned both coaches.

While nothing major came out of this, thankfully, I'm wondering whether I should have killed the play immediately, as both teams were involved. While you can say this is a HTBT, does anyone have any general rules for double-injury?

Immediate scoring attempt in progress....wait. Passing it around, dribbling around...kill it.

For me, it depends to some degree on the age of the players. I agree with Camron about an immediate scoring opportunity, but with little kids, I'm a lot more cautious than with teenagers. But any doubt, err on the side of safety first, as BryanV21 said.

Players safety is, and should be, #1.

If a player hits their head hard I'm stopping play immediately. If somebody in that situation gets upset that I prevented a basket then it's their priorities that are the problem.

I know got don't want this, but each situation can be much different. You have to ask yourself "can this wait?"

In the end, though, never be afraid to stop play in case of injury.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Two nights ago a player goes up for a contested dunk and his head hits the floor and he is knocked out cold like a boxer! Medics called to the scene and a fan shows a video to the officials proving that it was a clean play and the no call was correct..these guys can sleep easier tonight!

Huh? I have no idea what you're trying to tell me.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

This is my general rule as well.

"these guys can sleep easier tonight!"

"These guys" refers to the officials, who can "sleep easier tonight" (sarcasm), since the fan video proved that their call was correct - and that the fan cared more about the call than the health of the player.

No, I understand what the post in and of itself meant. What doesn't make sense is leaving it has a reply to my post, which had nothing to do with the fans or getting the call right.

Video of game this year.
 

What about this play?

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/Voe0ITBaYQw" frameborder="0" gesture="media" allow="encrypted-media" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

I don't see what happened right after he landed, so like these officials I would have continued down the court. Once the ball reached the division line we lose sight of the player, so I can't tell what's going on with him. The away team passes the ball around the perimeter a couple of times, giving the officials ample opportunity to stop play and attend to the player, though.

Assuming that once the ball reaches the division line, and the home player has not moved or sat down, I'm stopping play to check on him... long before the entry pass into the lane.

Play 1: I would have killed the play at 13 seconds.

Stop it on the try -- whether made or missed.

See 5-8-2 NOTE

Yep. As soon as he pulled back and wasn't running the break, I'd probably blow it dead.

I don't lose sight of players who go down and may be injured. In a 3-man crew, I will always stay in the backcourt until play can be stopped.

I meant the camera moved ahead so that I, as a viewer watching the video, couldn't see the player.

For the record, I'm with you. I won't leave an injured player.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Agree.

If those that did not know, I was on this particular game. I was the new lead in the situation and was unaware at the time that there was even an injury. I did not notice the player stayed back until the play was killed.

When I looked at the video, I was just fine with what was done. The Trail and the Center knew more about the play than I did at the time. I could make an argument that either thing could be done. I would have been fine if they stopped play and I was fine with them keeping the play going. The player was not in immediate danger. He was not going to bleed out, he was down for either turning his ankle or hurting his knee. If there were players around him then I get the position to totally stop the play. But when the player goes down, we have no idea if he is going to get up, which I see all the time and try to continue.

Full disclosure, the coach was upset and eventually got a T. It might have been for that situation, but I am not sure that was the only situation he was complaining about.

Peace

Coach might have been more upset at that Charmin Soft™ and-1 you called when he’s already down 12. :D

I kid, but have a more patient whistle there JRut. Don’t think you needed that one.

I am fine with the whistle. Two hands in the back on the shot that bowed the shooter. Called that silly foul all game on both sides as a crew. He is not defending the play, just pushing a player in the back. Calling that every game and situation.

Peace

While I probably would have stopped the play when the first pass was made and no drive or shot occurred, I can also see why play continued. HTBT and part of the crew.

As for the whistle, I agree with Rut. That is a foul and the whistle is needed. A two-handed push in the back cannot be ignored. I also personally agree with the personal foul call and-1. However, isn't that the type of action/foul the NFHS wants to be called as an intentional foul? No legitimate attempt to play the ball. Again, I am guilty of probably not calling intentional fouls when they should be called BY DEFINITION but I like the personal foul and-1.

I'm more concerned with the foul called on this play...From the camera angle it doesn't look like much

From the camera angle you can see the defender attempts to push the shooter. From the Lead's angle, the amount of contact is a lot easier to discern.

Bowing the back is not really a good indicator to use IMO. The shooter is too far under the basket and probably arches his back himself to get a better angle on the shot. The defender does not have his arms extended, does not displace the shooter, and the shooter is barely affected by the marginal contact.

It's pretty impressive that you can tell all that from the crappy camera angle we have in this clip and JRut is at a perfect angle to actually make the call. :rolleyes:

So from this camera you have a better determination of the contact than the Lead has?

I was doing sign language for 13 years and body language and other cues are huge. I use them in basketball. If I see the defenders arms tighten when that foul happens or as someone said the player arches on his own because he realizes he is too deep under the basket. All of that is taken into account including other plays that game. Just way too much judgement here and our camera angle isnt great. I do know this. Just listening to JRut for years... he has good judgement and I am going with his call every time.

OK, glad you know. But either way, I was not really looking for your approval, just stating what I saw. And in my world (and in my experience) that is a foul and a foul every time. The angle is not great in the video, but I saw the play clearly. If that is the worst thing you can say, then I am sleeping well at night about that call. Never crossed my mind it was not a foul. And I made a similar call like that last night.

Peace

Pretty sure he replied to your post as an example of what you suggested about people's priorities not being in order with regard to player safety.

What does your analysis of the body language clues tell you?

Ok.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

That's why I said from the camera angle

Well when a player does something unnatural or something they would not normally do with their body and contact took place, then it is a foul. We can always suggest that it did not change anything, but a player does not bow their back to make a normal shot. It would not be surprised me if he missed the shot, but he didn't and I am not waiting in this instance to see, so I called the foul. It is not always about the severity of the contact. Ironically I was back at the same school and we had several plays with much more contact and legal defenders and we called nothing in those cases.

Peace