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

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I am now confused as to what happened and who "scored it a 2."

Are you saying the official knew the shooter was behind the line and still didn't signal a 3 (or showed two fingers to the table, or similar)?

Yes. It was an alley opp pass from "way downtown" that touched nothing but net.

MTD, Sr.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Yes. It was an alley opp pass from "way downtown" that touched nothing but net.

MTD, Sr.

Oh -- so they (incorrectly) ruled that because it was not a try, it couldn't be worth 3 points? And at halftime the looked up the rule, realized they kicked it and changed the scoring?

Yes -- that's a CE and must be corrected in the CE timeframe.

[JRutledge]

Or maybe no one thought this was a question and did not signal a 3 point basket. I could see that happening, but the officials should signal a three signal once the ball goes into the basket.

Sounds like this is the semantics of the rule. Did the officials make a mistake or did the table not properly award a 3 point shot? I'm not sure that it would have been wrong for the book person to award a 3 point shot.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Sounds like this is the semantics of the rule. Did the officials make a mistake or did the table not properly award a 3 point shot?

There are a few separate issues here.

First, two points or three points for a "pass" from behind the three point arc that goes in? I can't speak for the NCAA, but it's three points in "modern" NFHS rules. If that rule is inadvertently set aside (misapplied) and the officials do not signal the three point "touchdown" signal, then we move onto the second issue.

Failing to signal the three point "touchdown" signal due to an inadvertently set aside (misapplied) rule is a correctable error situation that falls under the usual constraints and time frame restrictions of the correctable error rule.

On the other hand, if the officials did signal the three point "touchdown" signal, and the scorekeeper unilaterally decided, incorrectly due to his unfamiliarity with the rule, to mark two points instead of three points, that's a bookkeeping error that can be corrected up until the officials jurisdiction ends (NFHS).

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There are a few separate issues here.

First, two points or three points for a "pass" from behind the three point arc that goes in? I can't speak for the NCAA, but it's three points in "modern" NFHS rules. If that rule is inadvertently set aside (misapplied) and the officials do not signal the three point "touchdown" signal, then we move onto the second issue.

A.R. 113.A ball passed from behind the three-point line:
1. Enters the basket from above and passes through;
2. Is deflected and enters the basket from above and passes through; or
3. Strikes the side of the ring or the flange.

RULING
1: A three-point goal shall be counted.
2: When there is no possibility of the ball entering the basket from above and the deflection causes the goal to be successful, it shall be a two-point goal. However, when a ball is passed in the direction of the basket with the possibility of entering the basket from above and the deflection does not influence its success, a three-point goal shall be counted.
3: The ball shall remain live. In 1, 2 and 3, when a passed ball hits the
ring or flange and does not enter the basket, there is no reset of the shot clock. (Rule 5-1.1, 5-1.2.a, 5-1.3 and .4, 4-25 and 2-11.6.b.4 and 2-11.6.d.1)

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Failing to signal the three point "touchdown" signal due to an inadvertently set aside (misapplied) rule is a correctable error situation that falls under the usual constraints and time frame restrictions of the correctable error rule.

On the other hand, if the officials did signal the three point "touchdown" signal, and the scorekeeper unilaterally decided, incorrectly due to his unfamiliarity with the rule, to mark two points instead of three points, that's a bookkeeping error that can be corrected up until the officials jurisdiction ends (NFHS).

Are you sure about these statements?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you sure about these statements?

100% sure, but only for NFHS.

I know more about rocket surgery and brain science than I know about NCAA rules

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

100% sure, but only for NFHS.

I know more about rocket surgery and brain science than I know about NCAA rules

I am not sure I agree. Because if this is obviously a 3 and you never say it is a 2, then what is correctable?

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

100% sure, but only for NFHS.

I know more about rocket surgery and brain science than I know about NCAA rules

Still sounds like an opinion. Which is fine, but not the official position from the NF.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... in ancient NFHS times, when the three point arc were first painted on the court, if it was deemed a pass it would only count as two points. But, quoth the raven, nevermore.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

First, two points or three points for a "pass" from behind the three point arc that goes in? ... it's three points in "modern" NFHS rules.

I can certainly understand why the officials in the original post were confused. We have debated NFHS situations here on the Forum for similar situations, for example, deflected "passes", and deflected "shots", off of either offensive or defensive players, some being deflected off of body parts that are not hands, including "shots" or "passes" that were originally going "sideways" (east-west), all these being complex, and sometimes confusing, situations.

So let's look at an extreme situation, but we'll keep it as simple as possible. One important thing to remember is that the NFHS no longer requires a three point "basket" to be a try.

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.

Again, remember that the NFHS no longer requires a three point "basket" to be a try.

Discuss.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I can certainly understand why the officials in the original post were confused. We have debated NFHS situations here on the Forum for similar situations, for example, defected "passes", and deflected "shots", some being deflected off of body parts that are not hands, including "shots" or "passes that were originally going "sideways" (east-west), all these being complex, and sometimes confusing, situations.

So let's look at an extreme situation, but we'll keep it as simple as possible. One important thing to remember is that the NFHS no longer requires a three point "basket" to be a try.

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.

Again, remember that the NFHS no longer requires a three point "basket" to be a try.

Discuss.

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

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[Camron Rust]

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

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

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)

Whether it is a try or not a try, we are to treat it the same....we are not expected to attempt to determine the thrower's attempt. This case establishes that when a try (or thrown ball) is obviously short and drops below the level of the ring, the opportunity to score 3 points is over.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I'm not sure that it would have been wrong for the book person to award a 3 point shot.

I find this situation fascinating. Thanks JRutledge.

Officials inadvertently set aside (misapplied) the rule and don't signal three, but the scorekeeper marks it as three, knowing the proper rule.

Next, within the correctable error time frame, or outside of the correctable error time frame, the opposing coach questions the score, "You didn't signal three but the scorekeeper put up three".

In either situation, on time, or too late, what score goes up on the scoreboard?

[Mike Goodwin]

I can't see all of what the college crew did because they went out of frame (specifically: signal vs. no signal by each of the crew members), but this case book play closely resembles the video. [Fortunately for high-school officials: we no longer have to judge pass vs. try].

2.10.1 SITUATION K

A1 jumps and releases a try for goal apparently from behind the three-point line. The try is successful. The covering official does not indicate a three-point try and does not signal three points after the goal. The Team A coach rushes to the table and requests a 60-second time-out to discuss a correctable error. It is determined neither official clearly observed A1's location before the player jumped to try.

No change can be made and two points are properly scored. The 60-second time-out remains charged to Team A. (5-8-4)

[Edit]: this case play indicates that when an official does not signal a 3-pt try, the CE window opens.