Delays in end game

[so cal lurker]

HS. White is winning, black scrambling to catch up. With about thirty seconds left (and no time outs) black scores and a black player grabs the ball and holds it.

What’s the best way to handle? In the game I was watching, the ref blew the whistle (I think gave a DOG, but not sure—I was in the stands) and let Black sub and put in their defenders to press. Is that the best path, or would it be better for the ref to just let the clock keep running and tell the player to drop the ball? Blowing the whistle gave black 6-7 extra seconds, the ability to set their press, and the ability to sub.

(Same thing happened a second time, when black scored to come within 3 with 7 seconds left—this time the ref did nothing, and the game ended, followed by a black player flinging his mouth piece while glaring at the ref.)

[BillyMac]

Thirty seconds left? Delay of game warning (or technical foul if previously warned for any delay of game).

That's what I would do, however 9.2.10 SITUATION A (below) suggests an alternative harsher penalty.

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)

B1 reaching through the boundary plane and knocking the ball out of A1’s hands would always be a technical foul, regardless of the score, and time remaining.

Is that the same as B1 simply holding the ball?

I look forward to further discussion of 9.2.10 SITUATION A and hope to learn something.

One thing I'm sure of, no rule basis not to allow eligible substitutes (dead ball, clock stopped), so let them in.

Five seconds left? Let the clock run.

That's what I would do, however 10.4.10 SITUATION A and 10.4.10 SITUATION B suggests not to ignore certain delaying acts (knocks the ball out of A1’s hands, crosses the boundary line and fouls A1, reaches through the out-of-bounds plane and touches the ball while in the hands of A1), even if there's less than five seconds left, but these would always be a foul, regardless of the score, and time remaining.

Is that the same as B1 simply holding the ball? I don't believe so.

10.4.10 SITUATION A: After a field goal, A1 has the ball out of bounds for a throw-in. Thrower A1 holds the ball: (a) B2 crosses the boundary line and fouls A1; or (b) B2 reaches through the out-of-bounds plane and touches the ball while in the hands of A1. RULING: It is an intentional personal foul in (a), and a technical foul in (b). In (a), such a contact foul with the thrower during a throw-in shall be considered intentional, or if it is violent, it should be ruled flagrant. COMMENT: Either act is a foul and it should be ruled as such whenever it occurs during a game without regard to time or score or whether the team had or had not been warned for a delay-of-game situation. If the player making the throw-in (A1) reaches through the out-of-bounds plane into the court and B1 then slaps the ball from the hand of A1, no violation has occurred. B1 has merely slapped a live ball from the hands of A1. (4-19-3, 4; 9-2-10 Penalty 3, 4)

10.4.10 SITUATION B: After a field goal, the score is A-55, B-54. A1 has the ball out of bounds for a throw-in with two seconds remaining in the game. A1 throws the ball toward A2 who also is out of bounds along the end line. B2 reaches across the end line and grabs or slaps the ball while it is in flight. Time expires close to the moment the official indicates the infraction. RULING: A technical foul is charged against B2. The remaining time or whether Team B had been previously warned for a delay-of-game situation is not a factor. No free throws are awarded as the winner of the game has been determined. (9-2-10 Penalty 3, 4)

[crosscountry55]

Billy I love your work but you have over complicated this one.

Simple:

>5s, call the DOG. They can only use this tactic once because subsequent delays are Team Ts. Bully for them for thinking of it.

<5s, ignore, unless as mentioned it interferes with the TI team trying to make a TI.

In the OP situation there were 7s left, so a Team T for delay should have been called.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

>5, call the DOG. ... In the OP situation there were 7s left, so a Team T for delay should have been called.

I'm confused. Seven is more than five. For more than five you say call the delay of game warning (or technical foul), but for seven you say go directly to the technical foul.

That's my question.

It appears that the NFHS wants us to go directly to the foul for knocking the ball out of A1’s hands, crossing the boundary line and fouling A1, and reaching through the out-of-bounds plane and touching the ball while in the hands of A1 (as we always would regardless of the time remaining and score), but what about other types of delays (like B1 holding the ball) where we would "normally" give a warning (or a technical foul) for not-end-of-the-game situations?

If we would "normally" give a warning (or a technical foul) for not-end-of-the -game situations (like B1 holding the ball), would we skip the warning and go directly to a technical foul for the same situations (like B1 holding the ball) but at the end-of-the-game (greater then five seconds)?

With six minutes to go in the second period a team could tap the ball away and delay to set up their press. Does that mean that we should go directly to a technical foul for delay (even though no previous warning had been issued) because to only warn in this situation would "allow the team to benefit (set up their press) from the tactic ... if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning"?

Don’t both delays (throw-in plane violation; interfering with the ball following a goal violation) always interfere with the thrower’s efforts to make a throw-in?

I know when to go directly to a foul (knocking the ball out of A1’s hands, crossing the boundary line and fouling A1, and reaching through the out-of-bounds plane and touching the ball while in the hands of A1), regardless of the time remaining and score.

I'm not sure when to only warn (or technical foul) for a throw-in plane violation, or interfering with the ball following a goal violation, in an end-of-the-game situation versus going directly to a technical foul for the same act.

I'm guessing that the NFHS wants us to ignore throw-in plane violations, or interfering with the ball following a goal violations with less than five seconds left, but wants us to go directly to a foul for knocking the ball out of A1’s hands, crossing the boundary line and fouling A1, and reaching through the out-of-bounds plane and touching the ball while in the hands of A1, even with less than five seconds left.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm confused. Seven is more than five. For more than five you say call the delay of game warning (or technical foul), but for seven you say go directly to the technical foul.

That’s because I knew the same team had already been warned.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

That’s because I knew the same team had already been warned.

Got it, but I'm still not 100% sure when to call a delay (or technical foul), or when to go directly to a technical foul.

I've got many situations covered, but still have questions on some situations (throw-in plane, interfering with the ball).

[deecee]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Got it, but I'm still not 100% sure when to call a delay (or technical foul), or when to go directly to a technical foul.

I've got many situations covered, but still have questions on some situations (throw-in plane, interfering with the ball).

He covered it already.

> 5 seconds it's a DOG (warning or T depending on the number).
< 5 you ignore or go straight to the T if warranted.

No more complicated than that.

The T should have been called at the 7 second mark. IF the kid then still threw his mouthpiece then a second, and IMO flagrant, should be issued for flinging the mouthpiece AND staring me down.

[Raymond]

I'm not blowing my whistle for delay until the opposing team tries to get the ball for its throw-in. I'll allow about 4-5 seconds for that.

There is nothing telling us we have to blow our whistle immediately when the defense attempts to delay in this manner.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Jay R]

If NFHS joined the 21st century, they would stop the clock in the last minute. Problem solved.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jay R

If NFHS joined the 21st century, they would stop the clock in the last minute. Problem solved.

The 2018-19 NFHS Rules Committee ruled against this proposal:

...Recognizes each successful field goal in the last 59.9 seconds of the fourth quarter or any extra period.
Rationale: The proposed rule change would allow for the clock to stop in the final minute of a contest after any made basket, matching what other levels of play follow domestically. We feel this change would be beneficial to the high school game for a handful of reasons, including:
* Removing situations of deliberate Delay-of-Game offenses by either team (7-5-1/10-2-1b) in an effort to conserve/consume time in end-of-game situations
* Removes the somewhat ambiguous issue of what an appropriate amount of time is to "gather" and resume play by a team in the lead in the final minute
* Removes the situation wherein coaches encourage Delay-of-Game offenses by athletes to conserve/consume time
* Removes the situation where coaches are calling a "sixth" timeout to take a technical in an attempt to extend the game
* Coaches are more able to utilize their timeouts throughout the contest versus feeling compelled to conserve them for end-of-game stoppages of the clock
Ultimately, we feel that this rule improves our end-of-game situations for officials, coaches and fans alike; is able to be officiated/enforced by high school officials; is easily understandable for scorers and timers; and creates a more balanced situation between offensive and defensive squads, regardless of score.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The 2018-19 NFHS Rules Committee ruled against this proposal ...

Proposed by John Krogstrand, Pierre, South Dakota.

Any of you South Dakota guys know him? Wait ... I'm being told ... Are you sure, Krogstrand is the only person who lives there? Never mind.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Proposed by John Krogstrand, Pierre, South Dakota.

Wait....South Dakota has a shot clock, in open violation of NFHS rules. Yet they still have a rep on the rules committee? Fascinating....

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Jay R

If NFHS joined the 21st century, they would stop the clock in the last minute. Problem solved.

I would prefer this rule change over a shot clock, that's for sure.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[bucky]

Originally Posted by Jay R

If NFHS joined the 21st century, they would stop the clock in the last minute. Problem solved.

Yes, that problem would be solved but then more problems would arise.

Just a slidin' down the slippery slope of rules. Weeeee!

[so cal lurker]

while I agree it is a better rule, I have some doubts about the ability of HS tables to execute.

(I’m also surprised that more HS teams don’t seem to understand the timing rules, and try to inbound when they don’t have to. My son’s team knows the rule and plays to it when they are ahead—to the outrage of teams that feel aggrieved by them not even trying to inbound the ball.)