Strategic Lane Violation

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref

JR,

Sorry if it sounded like I was starting to flame. It truly wasn't meant to sound like that. I meant to be sarcastic and funny...so I apologize for anyone who may me taking it any differently.

Evidently, you and I (and at least Juulie) disagree here...as did my main partner and I initially. After discussing it at length...(and I did use the same analogy on him as I posted here--to which he thought was funny), we came to the resolution I posted earlier. And, I'll stick by it. I like it...and in my opinion, not only does it make good common sense, but it also is supported by the rulebook.

I simply can't accept that the intent of A's actions aren't promoting B's violation. Team A is gaining an advantage if an official ONLY penalizes team B. Again, this is after these coaches have publicly instructed each team to act as they are.

If I'm not making myself understood yet, I may never be understood!

I understand you completely. You are saying if you devine that A1's INTENT on the FT is less than up to your standards you will penalize team A.

There is no rule to permit you to do this. As long as A1 hits the rim or puts the ball in the hole while not violatng any of the other FT provisions that are clearly spelled out he has done nothing wrong.

That's all.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
I understand you completely. You are saying if you devine that A1's INTENT on the FT is less than up to your standards you will penalize team A.

There is no rule to permit you to do this. As long as A1 hits the rim or puts the ball in the hole while not violatng any of the other FT provisions that are clearly spelled out he has done nothing wrong.

That's all.

I'm with Dan on this one. What A is doing is not illegal, so it can't be penalized regardless of the intent. You still haven't answered why you would penalize both A and B when penalizing B only would solve the problem?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref

If A1 heaves the ball off the rim by the direction of team A coach, he/she is choosing to continue to promote an actionless contest. Now, I did say the player can miss...he/she just can't throw it one-handed at 50 MPH off the rim by direct instruction from his/her coach...and did I mention that I'm standing right there as said coach tells the player this? I think that can be assumed too.

AGAIN, assume I have already warned both coaches about their (and their team's) antics!

No, A is NOT promoting an actionless contest. The FT ends, and play continues -- what's "actionless" about that.

Case 5.9.3 gives a specific example where A purposely misses the FT and hits the rim. The play is legal.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref
[/B]

I like it...and in my opinion, not only does it make good common sense, but it also is supported by the rulebook.

[/B][/QUOTE]That was the point that I was trying to make back to you,Indy. I honestly don't think that giving team A a warning is supported by rule. I can't think of a rule that would allow us to warn team A when they are not violating any provision of the rules(again,that I can think of anyway). Team B- yes, because they are deliberately and repeatedly violating a rule.But I don't know what rule team A is violating by missing a foul shot.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Oct 23rd, 2003 at 01:18 PM]

[Camron Rust]

I can actually support Indy's position with the rules (emphasis mine)...

9-1-3: He/she shall throw within 10 seconds, and in such a way that the ball enters the basket or touches the ring before the free throw ends.

4-20-3: The free throw ends when the try is successful, when it is certain the try will not be successful, when the ball touches the floor or any player, or when the ball becomes dead.


So, according to these two rule, when the official determines that it will not be successful and it has not yet hit the rim, it is a violation. When can the official be certain that it will not be successful? If the ball is passing below the front of the rim then hits the back iron from the bottom, I'd bet that just about anyone can tell well before it gets there. Even when it is going towards the front but below the level of the ring, it is prettly obvious.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
I can actually support Indy's position with the rules (emphasis mine)...

9-1-3: He/she shall throw within 10 seconds, and in such a way that the ball enters the basket or touches the ring before the free throw ends.

4-20-3: The free throw ends when the try is successful, when it is certain the try will not be successful, when the ball touches the floor or any player, or when the ball becomes dead.


So, according to these two rule, when the official determines that it will not be successful and it has not yet hit the rim, it is a violation. When can the official be certain that it will not be successful? If the ball is passing below the front of the rim then hits the back iron from the bottom, I'd bet that just about anyone can tell well before it gets there. Even when it is going towards the front but below the level of the ring, it is prettly obvious.

Sooooo....A1, who couldn't put the ball into the Atlantic Ocean if he was falling off the Titanic, is at the line & puts up an obvious miss. You're at trail, see there's no way in hell it's going in & blow the whistle for a violation.

Yeah, sure ya do...

(...and as you blow the whistle the ball slams off the backboard and goes in. Go directly to 7th grade girls games. If you pass GO do not collect $200.)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
I can actually support Indy's position with the rules (emphasis mine)...

9-1-3: He/she shall throw within 10 seconds, and in such a way that the ball enters the basket or touches the ring before the free throw ends.

4-20-3: The free throw ends when the try is successful, when it is certain the try will not be successful, when the ball touches the floor or any player, or when the ball becomes dead.


So, according to these two rule, when the official determines that it will not be successful and it has not yet hit the rim, it is a violation. When can the official be certain that it will not be successful? If the ball is passing below the front of the rim then hits the back iron from the bottom, I'd bet that just about anyone can tell well before it gets there. Even when it is going towards the front but below the level of the ring, it is prettly obvious.

Yup,and in both cases,you would penalize the violation by the shooting team. And in both cases, that penalty would not allow that team to again commit that same violation. That's the difference in the two cases. Team A cannot possibly turn this into an actionless contest because they cannot repeat their violation,once or continually. Even if they violate on a following FT, that is a completely separate violation and can't possibly be considered as being repeatable because it is a different violation.

In other words, these rule citations does not support Indy's position because A can never repeat their violation,and thus turn the game into a farce.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Oct 23rd, 2003 at 10:04 PM]

[rainmaker]

And Indy wtill hasn't answered the question, "Why not just T up team B, and get it over with?"

[JeffTheRef]

"A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule."

If it looks like someone is going in early on purpose, call the violation once and admonish the individual that, if it happens again, it will be a T for unsportsmanlike contact, making a travesty of the game. This remedy is known to work.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by JeffTheRef
"A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule."

If it looks like someone is going in early on purpose, call the violation once and admonish the individual that, if it happens again, it will be a T for unsportsmanlike contact, making a travesty of the game. This remedy is known to work.

Occam - he was the original keep-it-simple-stupid guy, right?

Or did he make shaving products?

I dunno....

[Indy_Ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker
And Indy still hasn't answered the question, "Why not just T up team B, and get it over with?"

Because BOTH teams, by each one's direct actions, are trying to gain an advantage that is against the intent of the rules!

Team B: By continually breaking 9-1 and contributing to 10-5.

Team A: By continually breaking 4-20-1 and contributing to 10-5.

Again, if each of these acts are done mutually exclusive of the other, I'm probably saying to myself, "Good thinking" and...

...in the case of team B's mutually exclusive act, I penalize the violation. If after team B violates and they continue to violate, I warn coach B...and subsequently T coach B if team B continues to violate.

...in the case of team A's mutually exclusive act, I say "Good play!" whether they get the rebound or not.

However, in the case of A1 purposely heaving the ball off the rim with a baseball throw (or a similar act) to gain an advantage against the intent of rule 4-20-1 (to allow the free opportunity to score 1 point) and team B purposely committing FT violations to gain an advantage against the intent of rule 9-1 (to resume play after the end of the FT), I will warn, and penalize if necessary, both teams.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref
[/B]

Because BOTH teams, by each one's direct actions, are trying to gain an advantage that is against the intent of the rules!

Team A: By continually breaking 4-20-1 and contributing to 10-5.

...in the case of team B's mutually exclusive act, I penalize the violation. If after team B violates and they continue to violate, I warn coach B...and subsequently T coach B if team B continues to violate.

However, in the case of A1 purposely heaving the ball off the rim with a baseball throw (or a similar act) to gain an advantage against the intent of rule 4-20-1 (to allow the free opportunity to score 1 point) and team B purposely committing FT violations to gain an advantage against the intent of rule 9-1 (to resume play after the end of the FT), I will warn, and penalize if necessary, both teams.
[/B][/QUOTE]Still can't agree with that,Indy.

Rule 4-20-1 says that a FT is the "opportunity" only. It doesn't say that the FT must be made,or there there will be a violation called against team A if they legally miss the FT. How can team A be breaking any provision at all of R4-20-1 in this case,if they legally miss the FT? Again, there is absolutely nothing in the rulebook anywhere that could possibly be used to penalize team A for legally missing a FT. And if team A does commit any type of violation on a FT, it will be penalized according to the pertinent rule, and team A will not be given a chance at a replacement FT--so that team A can never possibly continue to violate,and thus make a farce of the game.

[Indy_Ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
..."opportunity" only.

Opportunity to what, JR???????? SCORE ONE POINT!! I will argue and interpret that in my stated situation, A1 is NOT utilizing the opportunity to score a single (one) point. Rather, they are only trying to RETRIEVE A REBOUND. In a sense, pass it off the backboard/rim to a teammate.

Why am I ruling this way? Because of multiple infractions, by my own rulebook interpretation, that have just been incurred by both teams.

This is my last post on this. It's not worth trying to explain a situation that will probably never happen.

[Edited by Indy_Ref on Oct 24th, 2003 at 12:42 PM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Indy_Ref

Opportunity to what, JR???????? SCORE ONE POINT!! I will argue and interpret that in my stated situation, A1 is NOT utilizing the opportunity to score a single (one) point. Rather, they are only trying to RETRIEVE A REBOUND. In a sense, pass it off the backboard/rim to a teammate.

Why am I ruling this way? Because of multiple infractions, by my own rulebook interpretation, that have just been incurred by both teams.

Indy, I agree with you 100% that team A is not utilizing their opportunity to score a point on the FT. I also agree 100% with you that they're only trying to retrieve a rebound. My point is that there is absolutely NO rule against team A doing either of those things.Both are completely legal acts under the rules.

It is impossible to have multiple infractions against team A, if they aren't committing a rules infraction in the first place.

Guess we gotta agree to disagree on this one- and let 'er go.

[Indy_Ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Guess we gotta agree to disagree on this one-and let 'er go.

Agreed.

I guess I lied...this IS my last post...promise!