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

[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

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Because if this is obviously a 3 and you never say it is a 2, then what is correctable?

2-1-1-E: Officials may correct an error if a rule is inadvertently set aside and results in: Erroneously counting or canceling a score.

In NFHS rules and mechanics, if officials don't signal a "touchdown" three then the field goal is assumed to be two points. No longer, as in ancient times, do officials have to signal one point (free throw) or two points (two point field goal).

2.7.8 - Signal for Point(s) During the course of the game, the officials: (a) do not signal successful two-point field goals or free throws; or (b) do signal the value of point(s) resulting from defensive goaltending or basket interference. RULING:*This is proper procedure. Officials are not authorized to signal the point value for two-point goal or free throws. However, it is necessary to signal in cases of doubt or confusion and when point(s) are awarded. Officials shall also continue to signal a successful three-point goal.

If, for whatever reason, officials don't signal a "touchdown" three for a successful shot from behind the three point arc, then this becomes a correctable error situation that falls under the usual constraints and time frame restrictions of the correctable error rule.

For example, ball is inbounded after the successful shot from behind the three point arc with no visual three point "touchdown" signal given, and officials, coaches, or table immediately question the number of points. This easily falls within the correctable error time frame restrictions, so it can be discussed, old trail says, "Yeah, I was distracted and forgot to give the "touchdown" signal", and it will be corrected to three points.

But, in the above situation, if officials, coaches, or table question the number of points after the correctable error time frame restrictions have passed, it's too late to correct and only two points are counted, even if the official says, "Yeah, I remember that, I was distracted and forgot to give the "touchdown" signal".

[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

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by jrutledge

still sounds like an opinion. Which is fine, but not the official position from the nf.

Peace

2.10.1j

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2.10.1j

2.10.1 SITUATION J: A1 attempts a goal from behind the three-point line: (a) but the covering official fails to give the successful signal after the ball goes through the basket, and the scorer records only two points; or (b) and the covering official gives the successful signal, but the scorer records only two points. Team B inbounds the ball and proceeds to score. The coach of Team A goes to the table and requests a 60-second time-out to discuss the error. RULING: In (a), the error of not awarding three points is correctable as it was detected prior to the second live ball after the error. The extra point is scored, the 60-second time-out is not charged and the game continues from the point of interruption. In (b), it is a -mistake by the scorer which can be corrected any time until the final score has been approved.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Are you sure about these statements?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

100% sure, but only for NFHS.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... sounds like an opinion ... not the official position from the NF.

Exactly what part of my explanation was an opinion that you disagree with?

[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.

[BryanV21]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

I swear I read that somewhere

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

[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 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)