Exam Question Thoughts

[BillyMac]

4.42.3 SITUATION: Following a goal by A1 the ball is: (a) inadvertently deflected under the bleachers; When does the throw-in begin and the ball become live? RULING: In (a), the official shall signal for the clock to be stopped. The throw-in begins and the ball becomes live when it is at the disposal of Team B. (4-4-7d)

Here are some of my editorial notes:

To remain consistent with NFHS rules with regard to proper rulings in situations where the ball is caught, deflects off, or is otherwise contacted by a player after a made goal, officials must determine if the player intentionally caused the game to be delayed, or if the contact with the ball was unintentional and/or did not cause the game to be delayed.

The following situations would most likely not warrant a warning for delay or a team technical foul if there had been a prior warning for delay, even if the ruling official stops the clock because the ball is not immediately available to the player making the throw-in.
A1's try for goal is successful and the ball quickly passes through the basket and:
A-2 catches the ball and immediately drops the ball near the end line, causing no delay in Team B readily making a throw-in.
The ball deflects off multiple players and bounces away from the end line. A-1's deflection of the ball does not create an obvious advantage for his or her team or a disadvantage for the opposing team.

The following situations most likely would warrant a warning for delay or a team technical foul if there had been a prior warning for delay:
A-1's try for goal is successful. The ball quickly passes through the basket and:
A-2 catches the ball and tosses it away from the end line, causing the ruling official to sound his or her whistle and administer an end line throw-in to Team B.
A-2 catches the ball and tosses the ball to the new Trail official, causing a delay in Team B readily making a throw-in that the player would have normally been able to make in a timely manner.
A-2 intentionally deflects the ball away from the end line, causing a delay in Team B readily making a throw-in.
A-2's deflection of the ball creates an obvious advantage for his or her team or a disadvantage for the opposing team.

In general, if the ruling official judges that a player who catches, deflects, or otherwise contacts the ball following the ball passing through the basket is intentionally attempting to delay the game or otherwise create an advantage for his or her team or a disadvantage for the opposing team, the appropriate ruling would be a warning for the first infraction of Rule 4-47 (warnings for delay), or a team technical foul for interfering with the ball following a goal after any team warning for delay (10-3e). If the ruling official judges that the player's catching, deflecting, or contact with the ball was accidental, unintentional, or otherwise does not cause the game to be delayed, there would be no delay of game warning or technical foul charged.

[Valley Man]

I think it is clear in the comment from the case book play 9.2.10 SIT A

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 shall be ingnored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interfere 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.

[BillyMac]

4-19-14: An unsporting foul is a noncontact technical foul which consists of unfair, unethical, dishonorable conduct or any behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.

10-2-4: A team shall not: Commit an unsporting foul.

10-4-6: A player shall not: Commit an unsporting foul. This includes, but is not limited to, acts or conduct such as …

[Valley Man]

Yep I am going with B.

No way I let the clock wind down with the ball in the bleachers.

Even if Team B misses both T free throws, turns the ball over at division line, and loses on a 3 pointer at the buzzer.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Valley Man

I think it is clear in the comment from the case book play 9.2.10 SIT A: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 shall be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interfere 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.

I fully understand what your'e saying, but ...

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There is a rule (Rule 10-1-5), and a casebook play (10.1.5 SITUATION D), that specifically state, in very clear terms, that we warn first when a player delays the game by interfering with the ball, by slapping it away, following a goal.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

10-4-5-A: A player shall not: Delay the game by acts such as: Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play.

10.1.5 SITUATION D: Immediately following a goal by A1, A3 slaps the ball
away so that Team B is unable to make a quick throw-in. RULING: The official
shall sound his/her whistle and go to the table to have the scorer record a team
warning for delay. The warning shall then be reported to the head coach of Team A.
Any subsequent delay by Team A shall result in a team technical foul charged
to Team A. (4-47-3)

So, based on 9.2.10 SIT A COMMENT: We charge a technical foul with four seconds left, but only warn (assuming no previous warning) with six seconds left?

Also, doesn't even a slight tap of the ball by Team A "interfere with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in", and isn't even a slight tap's "only purpose ... to stop the clock"?

While I see Valley Man's point, I also fully agree with LRZ:

Originally Posted by LRZ

This is one of those NFHS hair-splittings that don't make sense to me: how "unsporting" does conduct have to be to stop the clock and penalize? Where is the line between conduct that must be penalized, with the clock stopping, and conduct that must be ignored?

Originally Posted by LRZ

How momentary is momentary? How delayed is delay versus prevent? I don't see the distinction being clear enough to provide an objective standard.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

4-19-14: An unsporting foul is a noncontact technical foul which consists of unfair, unethical, dishonorable conduct or any behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play.

10-2-4: A team shall not: Commit an unsporting foul.

10-4-6: A player shall not: Commit an unsporting foul. This includes, but is not limited to, acts or conduct such as …

As LRZ points out, I would like a "more objective" standard from the NFHS.

Right now we've got a smorgasbord of delay, prevent, interfere, warning, technical foul, violation, unsporting, over/under five, stop clock, ignore, advantage/disadvantage, and egregious to choose from.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

So, based on 9.2.10 SIT A COMMENT: We charge a technical foul with four seconds left, but only warn (assuming no previous warning) with six seconds left?

No...if it is enough to T at 4 seconds, it is enough to T at 4 minutes.

Sometimes, you just have to referee.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No...if it is enough to T at 4 seconds, it is enough to T at 4 minutes. Sometimes, you just have to referee.

On a ball obviously premeditatedly and intentionally tossed into the bleachers (or kicked into the rafters) to stop the clock, or to allow the new defense to set up a press, regardless of score, or time remaining, I agree.

My immediate impulse in a real game would be to charge an unsporting player technical foul (and record a written delay warning) that doesn't have the requirement of a prior written warning.

Now change the situation to a ball slightly tapped away a few feet, which may not have been obviously intentional, or obviously premeditated, maybe add a little five second over/under for fun, or don't, and we may be entering a gray area? Maybe make this (just slightly tapped, not tossed, not kicked, not swatted "into the bleachers") a question on a written exam?

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Sometimes, you just have to referee.

That's why we get paid the big bucks, not to take a written exam, but to get out on the court to officiate a real life game.