Nine second rim hang = no call

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Well, if you care, then you should have read by now the post from Altor that states why it is legal in the NBA ... and in your case, a failure to read the pertinent post.

I read all about the NBA rules making this ring grasp legal. Now we have all been reminded why this is illegal in NFHS rules.

If I failed to read the pertinent post, how would I know this:

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... the timeout, the not taunting opponents, and the not delaying the game aspects of the NBA ruling have little to do with the NFHS rule (players clearing the area under the rim is relevant in NFHS rules. I'm not sure what the NBA means by it's legal because it's during a dead ball, doesn't most ring grasping take place during the dead ball period immediately after a dunk).

If I'm allowed to speculate, what does the NBA mean by it's legal because it's during a dead ball, doesn't most ring grasping take place during the dead ball period immediately after a dunk?

From the NBA: The ball is dead and he is not taunting opponents or delaying the game.

Does the NBA define dead ball differently than the NFHS? I guess that that is possible.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I read all about the NBA rules making this ring grasp legal. Now we have all been reminded why this is illegal in NFHS rules.

If I failed to read the pertinent post, how would I know this:



If I'm allowed to speculate, what does the NBA mean by it's legal because it's during a dead ball, doesn't most ring grasping take place during the dead ball period immediately after a dunk?

From the NBA: The ball is dead and he is not taunting opponents or delaying the game.

Does the NBA define dead ball differently than the NFHS? I guess that that is possible.

It means the ball wasn't live and he wasn't hanging on the rim while other players are trying to shoot or something like that.


You've been given an explanation and you're still not satisfied, that's the problem. I don't see anybody else here confused as to what the ruling would be in their own games. Why do you feel like other officials in this forum don't know the rules and how to apply them to their own games?

Did anybody here give an indication that this would be legal in one of their games? Anybody here say they don't know the rule in one of their own games?

Your constant speculation does more to confuse new officials than help them.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

It means the ball wasn't live and he wasn't hanging on the rim while other players are trying to shoot or something like that. You've been given an explanation and you're still not satisfied, that's the problem. Why do you feel like other officials in this forum don't know the rules and how to apply them to their own games?

One single explanation (from Raymond, above, "or something that"). Not a single explanation regarding the NBA "dead ball" statement before Raymond's. And who says that I'm not satisfied after getting the single explanation?

Why do you assume that everyone who views this Forum, both members, and nonmembers, are officials? We have players, coaches, and fans that get sent here after posing a question on a search engine. Some decide to join just to ask questions (long time lurker, first time poster).

Why do you assume that every official on this Forum is experienced, knows all the rules, knows all the interpretations, knows all the mechanics, knows all the differences in rule sets, etc. Officials have to be beginners at some point in their career, they're not born as great officials that never have any questions.

I view one of the purposes of the Forum to be educational. Maybe I'm in the minority? Maybe I'm biased because of my thirty-plus year teaching background, my service on training committees for both rules and mechanics, and the publication of several of my educational basketball officiating articles in magazines?

Teaching is in my blood, whether it's teaching science, or teaching basketball officiating.

I've been officiating for almost four decades, and I've been a Forum member over a dozen years, and yet, I learn something on the Forum all the time. And if I don't learn something new, I'm often reminded about things that I already know, things that are reinforced in my mind. Repetition is an important part of learning. Most people don't learn something well by learning it only once.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

....

I view one of the purposes of the Forum to be educational. Maybe I'm in the minority? ...

I view it to be educational also. And I also view it to be tailored towards basketball officials. You throwing in stories about Lew Alcindor, Darryl Dawkins, and James Naismith doesn't help a new official or a lurking fan understand the rules. It just throws in a bunch of extraneous thoughts in their mind that have nothing to do with the rule they are trying to learn.

If you want to know the NBA rule, look it up and provide us the information, instead of waiting for someone else to do your legwork. You have the same access to the NBA rules as anyone else in this forum.

And I'll ask you again, do you seriously think anybody in the forum doesn't know this would a Technical Foul in the rule set they officiate?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Do you seriously think anybody in the forum doesn't know this would a Technical Foul in the rule set they officiate?

Officials? Absolutely not. They all know it.

Coaches, players? They probably know it also.

Fans? Often not the sharpest tools in the shed.

Me? NBA? Still not sure about the dead ball thing, but believe that it was the correct no-call based on the NBA's followup. Regarding NBA rules, other than whetting my innate curiosity, like our beautiful First Lady, I really don't care, so I won't pursue it.

Note: I guarantee that ilyazhito will never again wonder why hanging on the ring is a bad thing. It's all about context. Am I right ilyazhito?