Correctable Error: 3pt FGA: Utah State vs Portland State Men's Game.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BryanV21

Three pointer. If the ball had bounced inside the arc it would be two points.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not correct and it doesn't matter where it bounces...

Originally Posted by BryanV21

I swear I read that somewhere

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

You read that a try is over if the ball strikes the floor. Therefore, if a long throw bounces on the floor and then enters the basket, it cannot be worth three points. There is even an NFHS case play in which this happens (with or without the expiration of time at the end of a quarter.) Camron is astutely telling you that you incorrectly added a phrase stating where the ball bounces when you wrote “inside the arc.” He is pointing out that it doesn’t matter whether the ball bounces inside or outside the arc, merely the fact that it contacted the floor somewhere is enough to eliminate the possibility of a 3-point goal.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... the whole point of the rule change was that if a ball is thrown to the basket and you can't tell if it a try or pass, count it as if it were a try if it goes in. When there is no doubt about what it was...it's not going to the basket, much less going in, without someone else changing the direction so that it goes in, it is simply a live ball that got deflected into the basket, no different than it was prior to that rule change. Everyone understood that at the time.

Another great purpose and intent explanation, mix this together with bob jenkin's explanation, add a pinch of salt, and one has a pretty good basis to make interpretations regarding such situations.

However, for the tens of thousands of officials who weren't the "everyone" around to remember somebody painting the first arcs on gymnasium floors, and then the subsequent alley oop rule change, it would be nice if the NFHS could somehow codify purpose and intent, with rule language changes, and casebook interpretations (please, no annual interpretations, or points of emphasis).

Also, was it simply an alley oop change, or were there also changes regarding the ball touching a defensive player who was inside the arc, as in a deflected (blocked) "throw"? And, of course the alley oop change also complicated the interpretation of goaltending.

Again, I sometimes wish that the NFHS continued to limit three points to trys.

If wishes were horses then beggars would ride,
If turnips were swords I’d have one by my side.
If ‘ifs’ and ‘ands’ were pots and pans
There would be no need for tinker’s hands!
(Scottish nursery rhyme)

[BillyMac]

5-2-1: A successful try, tap or thrown ball from the field by a player who is located behind the team’s own 19-foot, 9-inch arc counts three points. A ball that touches the floor, a teammate inside the arc, an official, or any other goal from the field counts two points for the team into whose basket the ball is thrown.

5.2.1 SITUATION A: A1 attempts a three-point goal. B1 slaps the ball: (a) while it is in downward flight outside the cylinder, but above the ring level; or (b) while it is in the cylinder after bouncing off the ring. RULING: It is defensive goaltending in (a) and defensive basket interference in (b). Three points are awarded in both cases as a result of the violation. (9-11, 12)

5.2.1 SITUATION B: With 2:45 left in the second quarter, B1 has the ball on the left wing in Team B's frontcourt, standing behind the three-point arc. B5 makes a backdoor cut toward the basket. B1 passes the ball toward the ring and B5 leaps for the potential "alley-oop" dunk. The ball, however, enters and passes through the goal directly from B1's pass and is not touched by B5. RULING: Score three points for Team B. A ball that is thrown into a team's own goal from behind the three-point arc scores three points, regardless of whether the thrown ball was an actual try for goal.

5.2.1 SITUATION C: A1 throws the ball from behind the three-point line. The ball is legally touched by: (a) B1 who is in the three-point area; (b) B1 who is in the two-point area; (c) A2 who is in the three-point area; or (d) A2 who is in the two-point area. The ball continues in flight and goes through A's basket. RULING: In (a) and (b), three points are scored since the legal touching was by the defense and the ball was thrown from behind the three-point line. In (c), score three points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred behind the three-point line. In (d), score two points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred in the two-point area.

4.41.4 SITUATION B: A1’s three-point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a) A2; or (b) B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. RULING: The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS rules. First let's set it up. Ninety-four foot court, in a "stadium" setting with an extremely high ceiling, highest ceiling on the planet. Middle of a period so the clock and buzzer don't complicate matters in any possible manner. A1 from deep in his backcourt, "throws" the ball forward, long, far, and very high. Ball hits the floor in the frontcourt six inches behind the three point arc, bounces off the floor and enters the basket, untouched by anybody.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Therefore, if a long throw bounces on the floor and then enters the basket, it cannot be worth three points. There is even an NFHS case play in which this happens (with or without the expiration of time at the end of a quarter).

5-2-1: A ball that touches the floor ... counts two points for the team into whose basket the ball is thrown.

5.1.1 SITUATION B: A pass, a tap or a try for field goal by A1 is in flight when the horn sounds indicating the expiration of time in the third quarter. The ball subsequently comes down several feet in front of the basket, strikes the floor without touching any player and bounces into the basket. RULING: When deemed a pass and not a try, the ball becomes dead immediately when the horn sounds. However, a try or tap by A1 towards A’s basket does not become dead until the try or tap ends, which it does when it touches the floor. Therefore, no points are scored. (4-41-2, 4, 5)

[BillyMac]

What about a "thrown" ball from outside the arc that touches a teammate (or opponent) outside the arc on the shoulder and subsequently enters the basket?

Since many were not alive when arcs were first painting on gymnasium floors, and for the subsequent alley oop rule change, and thus weren't privy to comments on these rules revisions, and thus original purpose and intent, please base one's answer only on the current rule definition and the current casebook plays.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

4.41.4 SITUATION NEW: A1’s three-point try is ... below ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a) A2; or (b) B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket.

Note that I've changed the interpretation above to delete any reference to "short".

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What about a "thrown" ball from outside the arc that touches a teammate (or opponent) outside the arc on the shoulder and subsequently enters the basket?

Note that I've changed the interpretation above to delete any reference to "short".

You cant remove the word "short" -- when the ball is short and DESCENDS below the ring height, the original throw / try ends. Ans subsequent deflection/ rebound into the basket is two points.

If the ball is "on the way up" and is deflected while STILL below the height of the ring, it's still a try / throw and worth three points.

IOW, stop focusing only on the location of the ball relative to the ring and start focusing on the whole play.

[BillyMac]

Sorry, I thought that "short" referred to north/south, not up/down.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If the ball is "on the way up" and is deflected while STILL below the height of the ring, it's still a try / throw and worth three points.

I was alive the watched the gym floor painter paint the original arc and agree with bob jenkins. I especially like his wording "on the way up".

However, I wish that the NFHS would add "on the way up" to its rulebbok and casebook, if not for anything else, then for the young'uns.

Always say "Merry Christmas" to bob.

[Raymond]

There are no young officials worried about that play, you are. Quit being a proxy.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

There are no young officials worried about that play, you are. Quit being a proxy.

Exactly. It is not that deep. There are multiple locations where officials from all ranges follow certain situations and plays, this is not one that keeps them up at night.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... officials worried ...

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... not one that keeps them up at night ...

Perplexed three NCAA-M Division I officials, so odd three point arc plays aren't as perfectly clear as some would make them out to be..

Merry Christmas.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Perplexed three NCAA-M Division I officials, so odd three point arc plays aren't as perfectly clear as some would make them out to be..

Merry Christmas.

You don't know why the call was missed, changed or adjudicated the way it was.

And as usual you have taken this conversation so many different places you don't even know what we're referencing.

We're talking about you taking this conversation to the ball hitting the shoulder of somebody outside the three-point line.

No one is sitting around worrying about that. You're worrying about that, but then you try to pawn it off as "the youngins are wondering what to do". Quit with the passive aggressive posting. All these questions are for you. You're not representing all the young officials of the nation.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

... the ball hitting the shoulder of somebody outside the three-point line ... All these questions are for you.

Yes, I would like cited answers for everybody, and everybody incudes me.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Yes, I would like cited answers for everybody, and everybody incudes me.

Quit speaking for others. I didn't ask, and I didn't ask you to ask for me. That's the thing you do that perturbs me and turns me off about a lot of your posts. That's always your excuse when you take these topics off into outer space.

I'm more in touch with what young officials are trying to learn than you are. I know that just by the fact of what I see you post and see you ask.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Quit speaking for others.

Fine.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I would like cited answers ...

From anybody on the forum.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What about a "thrown" ball from outside the arc that touches a teammate (or opponent) outside the arc on the shoulder and subsequently enters the basket? ... please base one's answer only on the current rule definition and the current casebook plays.

I will even accept two different answers from one poster, one based on the current the rule definition and the current casebook plays, and another based on purpose and intent, for those of us old enough to remember and understand the rule changes and the associated intent and purpose.

I am not totally ignoring Camron Rust, bob jenkins, and others, I would simply like to see how their purpose and intent explanations jive with current rule definitions and the current casebook plays.

Or, as a Forum member pointed out a few months ago in regard to disappearing interpretations and points of emphasis, (paraphrased) "Something in the current book to show a coach", or "Something in the current book to show a trainee official".

Of course, experienced veteran basketball officials would rely on current rule definitions, current casebook plays, and purpose and intent, but that is not what I'm asking.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

5-2-1: A successful try, tap or thrown ball from the field by a player who is located behind the team’s own 19-foot, 9-inch arc counts three points. A ball that touches the floor, a teammate inside the arc, an official, or any other goal from the field counts two points for the team into whose basket the ball is thrown.

5.2.1 SITUATION A: A1 attempts a three-point goal. B1 slaps the ball: (a) while it is in downward flight outside the cylinder, but above the ring level; or (b) while it is in the cylinder after bouncing off the ring. RULING: It is defensive goaltending in (a) and defensive basket interference in (b). Three points are awarded in both cases as a result of the violation. (9-11, 12)

5.2.1 SITUATION B: With 2:45 left in the second quarter, B1 has the ball on the left wing in Team B's frontcourt, standing behind the three-point arc. B5 makes a backdoor cut toward the basket. B1 passes the ball toward the ring and B5 leaps for the potential "alley-oop" dunk. The ball, however, enters and passes through the goal directly from B1's pass and is not touched by B5. RULING: Score three points for Team B. A ball that is thrown into a team's own goal from behind the three-point arc scores three points, regardless of whether the thrown ball was an actual try for goal.

5.2.1 SITUATION C: A1 throws the ball from behind the three-point line. The ball is legally touched by: (a) B1 who is in the three-point area; (b) B1 who is in the two-point area; (c) A2 who is in the three-point area; or (d) A2 who is in the two-point area. The ball continues in flight and goes through A's basket. RULING: In (a) and (b), three points are scored since the legal touching was by the defense and the ball was thrown from behind the three-point line. In (c), score three points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred behind the three-point line. In (d), score two points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred in the two-point area.

4.41.4 SITUATION B: A1’s three-point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a) A2; or (b) B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. RULING: The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1)

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What about a "thrown" ball from outside the arc that touches a teammate (or opponent) outside the arc on the shoulder and subsequently enters the basket?

Raymond is correct, I'm through asking questions. Gonna take the bull by the horns.

Here's my personal take on my "thrown" ball "shoulder" question (directly above).

Based on a purely academic reading of the current rule definition and the current casebook plays, three points (both teammate and opponent).

Based on recent purpose and intent explanations by Camron Rust, and bob jenkins (“below the ring height”, "on the way up", “can't tell if it a try or pass, count it as if it were a try if it goes in. When there is no doubt about what it was ... it's not going to the basket, much less going in, without someone else changing the direction so that it goes in, it is simply a live ball that got deflected into the basket.”), two points (even if these explanations may not be the "official" purpose and intent of the NFHS).

Real game for me, two points (could probably pull it off with a confident, authoritarian sounding, "It's not a try" lie to a coach).

Written test for me, unsure, but current citations seem to "prove" three points.

Sure, I sound "foolish", but at least I took somewhat of a stand and offered citations.

As Ricky Nelson sang, "Though I see the danger there, if there's a chance for me, then I don't care".

I am now fully prepared to deservedly take on the slings and the arrows.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Of course, experienced veteran basketball officials would rely on current rule definitions, current casebook plays, and purpose and intent ...