No padding on backboard

[rotationslim]

Rule is clear, but you also have to apply common sense. The meeting with BOTH coaches agreeing that it isn't an issue for their athletes would be significant in my decision to allow the game to go on. It being a playoff game it seems like athletic directors from schools are also in attendance, did they weigh in on the issue? Obviously it is bizzare that in this day and age there isnt padding on there-- I cant even imagine how that exists. The peach baskets duct taped to the plywood fantail in my church gym even has padding.. I would have felt like I was walking into one of those movies about 1950's Indiana high school basketball.

[BryanV21]

If both coaches agree to allow players 7 fouls before they are disqualified from the game is that okay, too?

I don't mean to imply that I would want to, or ever would suspend the game. However, I would feel better about things if a "higher up" gave us the thumbs up to play.

Where is the line between common sense and going by the rule book? Is that just one of those things that experience has to teach you?

[rotationslim]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

If both coaches agree to allow players 7 fouls before they are disqualified from the game is that okay, too?...Where is the line between common sense and going by the rule book? Is that just one of those things that experience has to teach you?

Geez.. everyone wants to be a hardcase-- the discussion on this board was about applying common sense. Meeting with the coaches would be gathering pertinent information to use in the judgement call as to allow the game to continue or not. Pretty much the only thing that is relevant to the "safety" aspect is if any player on the court could elevate to a level that put his head in proximity to the bottom of the backboard. Pretty sure the coaches are the ones who can tell you that, and I know we are supposed to demonize and belittle coaches on this board, but in this case they are the source of the information you need to make a wise ("wise" meaning applying judgement to facts that you have) decision.

And, BTW this "playoff game" sounds like such a slipshod operation that if you, as ref, walked off and refused to call it they probably would have grabbed the mom taking tickets and given her a whistle and said "game on"

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by rotationslim

Geez.. everyone wants to be a hardcase-- the discussion on this board was about applying common sense. Meeting with the coaches would be gathering pertinent information to use in the judgement call as to allow the game to continue or not. Pretty much the only thing that is relevant to the "safety" aspect is if any player on the court could elevate to a level that put his head in proximity to the bottom of the backboard. Pretty sure the coaches are the ones who can tell you that, and I know we are supposed to demonize and belittle coaches on this board, but in this case they are the source of the information you need to make a wise ("wise" meaning applying judgement to facts that you have) decision.

And, BTW this "playoff game" sounds like such a slipshod operation that if you, as ref, walked off and refused to call it they probably would have grabbed the mom taking tickets and given her a whistle and said "game on"

I'm sorry, I must have missed the part of the rule that talked about it only applying to certain players.

I'm not the only one looking to cover his ass, either. It's not about being a "hardcase" it's about doing the right thing in terms of rules and safety.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[rotationslim]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I'm sorry, I must have missed the part of the rule that talked about it only applying to certain players.

I'm not the only one looking to cover his ass, either. It's not about being a "hardcase" it's about doing the right thing in terms of rules and safety.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

I am not talking about the rule here. The rules is clear, and well understood. I am talking about applying judgement to the situation here. While the "rule" applies equally to all players, the actual risk of injury would apply only to players who could jump high enough to get their head near the backboard.

And I am the first to waive off a game where there exists a legitimate dangerous condition. In this case it does not sound like there is anything like a legitimate risk to the players wellbeing.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by rotationslim

I am not talking about the rule here. The rules is clear, and well understood. I am talking about applying judgement to the situation here. While the "rule" applies equally to all players, the actual risk of injury would apply only to players who could jump high enough to get their head near the backboard.

If I were they only one with the same concerns I'd say "ok".

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Mark Padgett]

Do you guys ever check the Hot Moms for padding?