The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   New one last night (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/105288-new-one-last-night.html)

tw1ns Thu Feb 11, 2021 09:52am

New one last night
 
VISITING team is down by 10 with 15 secs left in game come down and drain a 3 pointer. one of the VISITING players grabs the ball after it goes through the net and just holds it, bear hugs it actually. I am thinking, "what is he doing?" the clock is running and they are still down 7. I hear 'just hold it' from the bench. one of the home team players actually tries to grab the ball....i snapped out of my confusion and blow my whistle and issue a T. The visiting team bench asks me if there should have been a warning first, and i explained that this was an intentional act, an unsporting act and the T was warranted. I gave the T to the player that was holding the ball....my question is, should this have been a TEAM technical rather than a player tech?

SC Official Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:19am

It should have been a team warning for delay for interfering with the ball after a goal, not a technical foul. If it had been the team's second delay, it would be a team technical foul not charged to the player.

I suppose you "could" rule it unsporting, but why break into jail and give a T to the team that's going to lose when the rules give you a better alternative?

BryanV21 Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:30am

Quote:

Originally Posted by SC Official (Post 1041485)
It should have been a team warning for delay for interfering with the ball after a goal, not a technical foul. If it had been the team's second delay, it would be a team technical foul not charged to the player.

I suppose you "could" rule it unsporting, but why break into jail and give a T to the team that's going to lose when the rules give you a better alternative?

So if the team had just gone up 1 point you'd call it differently? Or would you add time back to the clock?

Either you're allowing the team to do something shady and helping them win, which stinks, or you're enforcing the rules in a manner not laid out in the rule book.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Raymond Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:42am

Quote:

Originally Posted by tw1ns (Post 1041484)
VISITING team is down by 10 with 15 secs left in game come down and drain a 3 pointer. one of the VISITING players grabs the ball after it goes through the net and just holds it, bear hugs it actually. I am thinking, "what is he doing?" the clock is running and they are still down 7. I hear 'just hold it' from the bench. one of the home team players actually tries to grab the ball....i snapped out of my confusion and blow my whistle and issue a T. The visiting team bench asks me if there should have been a warning first, and i explained that this was an intentional act, an unsporting act and the T was warranted. I gave the T to the player that was holding the ball....my question is, should this have been a TEAM technical rather than a player tech?

You were right not to do anything until the home team attempted to get the ball. At that point it should have been a warning. I would not have been in any hurry to blow the whistle.

SC Official Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:50am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1041486)
So if the team had just gone up 1 point you'd call it differently? Or would you add time back to the clock?

Either you're allowing the team to do something shady and helping them win, which stinks, or you're enforcing the rules in a manner not laid out in the rule book.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

What are you talking about? How is assessing a delay warning in this situation not correct by rule?

BryanV21 Thu Feb 11, 2021 10:53am

You said they were going lose anyway so why do something he "could" do. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the way you worded it seems off.

This rule seems to need amending as it can be taken advantage of, which isn't in the spirit of the game.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

SC Official Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:00am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1041489)
You said they were going lose anyway so why do something he "could" do. I'm not saying you're wrong, but the way you worded it seems off.

This rule seems to need amending as it can be taken advantage of, which isn't in the spirit of the game.

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Any supervisor I have ever worked for is not going to be happy if he gets a phone call from the losing coach asking why they were given a T instead of a delay warning in the OP's situation. Contrarily, no one can argue with a straight face that this is not a delay of game situation.

If you think an unsporting T is the better option in this situation than a delay warning - I don't know what to tell you. You are breaking into jail by going straight to a T here, and possibly misapplying the rules as well.

Altor Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:15am

Is this play that much different from the case play where the teams hits the ball into the stands to induce a DoG warning? Doesn't that play give the official to options to assess a technical foul or just let the clock expire while the ball is retrieved?

SC Official Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:23am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Altor (Post 1041492)
Is this play that much different from the case play where the teams hits the ball into the stands to induce a DoG warning? Doesn't that play give the official to options to assess a technical foul or just let the clock expire while the ball is retrieved?

Key is "gives the official the option." Just because you have the option to do something doesn't mean it's the best choice.

tw1ns Thu Feb 11, 2021 11:30am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Altor (Post 1041492)
Is this play that much different from the case play where the teams hits the ball into the stands to induce a DoG warning? Doesn't that play give the official to options to assess a technical foul or just let the clock expire while the ball is retrieved?

That's kinda what went through my mind as it was happening...recalling that play and the intent that went with it. I probably would have just let the clock run out, but one of the home team players starting grabbing and wrestling him for the ball....thats when i issued the T.

BryanV21 Thu Feb 11, 2021 12:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by SC Official (Post 1041490)
Any supervisor I have ever worked for is not going to be happy if he gets a phone call from the losing coach asking why they were given a T instead of a delay warning in the OP's situation. Contrarily, no one can argue with a straight face that this is not a delay of game situation.



If you think an unsporting T is the better option in this situation than a delay warning - I don't know what to tell you. You are breaking into jail by going straight to a T here, and possibly misapplying the rules as well.

I'm not saying give the tech. I'm asking you that stuff based on what you said. Why even bring up the idea of possibly giving the unsportsmanlike?

Sent from my SM-G973U using Tapatalk

Nevadaref Thu Feb 11, 2021 12:51pm

There is more going on here. Perhaps the point differential in the game matters for a tie-breaker or playoff seeding.

What this team did was more than merely knock the ball away following a goal. They grabbed it, deliberately held it, and caused a confrontation with the opponent when he rightfully tried to obtain it. I would issue a player technical foul in this situation for delay of game. The rules book language is something akin to preventing the ball from being made promptly live.

BillyMac Thu Feb 11, 2021 12:55pm

Tangled Web ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BryanV21 (Post 1041489)
This rule seems to need amending as it can be taken advantage of, which isn't in the spirit of the game.

Agree.

With the Google Document link below, find my research on this and similar situations. For years I've been meaning to write on article on such situations but can't seem to come up with any "solid" recommendations based on the rules, or on casebook plays. It's just research and not even close to an article, but it shows the complexity of the issue.

The terminology that unsporting fouls are "not limited to" makes it a valid option.

The terminology of preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play makes it another valid option.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing

BillyMac Thu Feb 11, 2021 12:56pm

Not Limited To ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 1041504)
... more than merely knock the ball away following a goal. They grabbed it, deliberately held it, and caused a confrontation with the opponent when he rightfully tried to obtain it. I would issue a player technical foul in this situation for delay of game ...

I would rather go the unsporting; or preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play route.

Camron Rust Thu Feb 11, 2021 01:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 1041504)
There is more going on here. Perhaps the point differential in the game matters for a tie-breaker or playoff seeding.

What this team did was more than merely knock the ball away following a goal. They grabbed it, deliberately held it, and caused a confrontation with the opponent when he rightfully tried to obtain it. I would issue a player technical foul in this situation for delay of game. The rules book language is something akin to preventing the ball from being made promptly live.

Agree. When the player refused to release the ball, it moved from being a simple delay to preventing the ball from becoming live..

Quote:

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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:33pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1