Gaining an advantage is not the bar for what she got T'd with. But it involves two things that could get a warning. Either way, a warning was given prior. Different rule as it relates to the Men's game for sure.

Peace

Ambiguous Clauses ...
 

Agree. The wording of the two clauses, separated by the word "or", is a little ambiguous, but I believe that the word "advantage" probably only refers to the 'interfering with the ball after a goal" clause and probably doesn't refer to the "immediately pass the ball to the nearest official" clause.

We probably need a Forum member who is very knowledgeable in NCAA-W rules to to confirm or deny.

NCAA-W Rule 4 Section 9 Delay
Art. 1. A delay is any action that impedes the progress or continuity of the game. Such actions include, but are not limited to:
a. Failure to supply scorers with data per Rule 3-4.1;
b. Consuming a full minute by not being ready when it is time to start either half or any overtime;
c. Delaying the game by preventing the ball from being promptly made live or by preventing continuous play, such as but not limited to, followers or bench personnel entering the playing court before player activity has been terminated. When the delay does not interfere with play, it shall be ignored, and play shall be continued or be resumed at the point of interruption;
d. Repeatedly delaying the game by preventing the ball from being promptly put into play, such as delaying the administration of a throw-in or free throw by engaging in a team huddle anywhere on the playing court;
e. Failure to have the court ready for play after the final horn to end any timeout;
f. Attempting to gain an advantage by interfering with the ball after a goal or by failing to immediately pass the ball to the nearest official after a whistle is blown; or
g. The opponents of the thrower-in having any part of their person beyond the vertical inside plane of any boundary line before the ball has crossed that boundary line.
Art. 2. One team warning shall be given for each of the delays in Rule 4-9.1.d through .g. Each warning shall be reported to the official scorer. Thereafter, a technical foul shall be assessed for the delay that has previously received a team warning.

The operative word is "or" which means the first part of that sentence applies one thing and the other is simply not giving the officials the ball. It did not say "and." It said, "or."

What advantage in the game does take place if you do not give the ball to the nearest official? I cannot think of one. Because this is usually done when there is a clear dead ball (not after a made basket).

OR
conjunction

conjunction: or

1.
used to link alternatives.
"a cup of tea or coffee"
2.
introducing a synonym or explanation of a preceding word or phrase.
"the espionage novel, or, as it is known in the trade, the thriller"

Peace

Independent And Dependent Clauses ...
 

Agree.

Agree.

However, not necessarily in this case (common basketball sense applies here, how can a team gain an advantage by doing this), but in similar sentence (maybe not specifically related to basketball), that may not be so easily understood using common sense. I'm sure that speaking in a particular manner (with pregnant pauses), can make it seem that the introductory statement "attempting to gain an advantage by interfering with the ball after a goal or by failing to immediately pass the ball to the nearest official after a whistle is blown.", can make it appear that the introductory statement "attempting to gain an advantage" applies to both clauses; "interfering with the ball after a goal" as well as "failing to immediately pass the ball to the nearest official".

My high school English teacher, Mr. Baumgartner, would be very disappointed that I can't explain this better. Maybe something to do with compound sentences and independent (or dependent) clauses?

This rule could somehow be written better (maybe added punctuation, possibly a semicolon between "goal" and "or") so that we are 100% sure that the introductory statement "attempting to gain an advantage" absolutely does not apply to "failing to immediately pass the ball to the nearest official". I think that chapmaja and Mr. Baumgartner might agree with me.

However, to basketball officials, how it's currently written is probably just fine.

I (a high school official) believe that I know the purpose and intent of the rule and what the rule means, just not sure that it would hold up in a court of law with non-basketball-official attorneys, judges, and jurors parsing words in this somewhat complex compound sentence.

Here's another complex compound sentence high school rule that can leave some officials confused by independent clauses with the word "or":

https://forum.officiating.com/basket...ml#post1049088

If we're parsing English (and IANAG - I am not a grammarian) and if you connect the two parts of the rule,

"Such actions include, but are not limited to ... attempting to gain an advantage by interfering with the ball after a goal or by failing to immediately pass the ball to the nearest official after a whistle is blown",

the second use of the word "by" indicates that the "failing to immediately pass" is a method of gaining an advantage.

If that's not the intent, the rule should be reworded. Just adding a comma or semi-colon can't fix that.

Was it disrespectful, though?

Thank You Mr. Baumgartner ...
 

Nice explanation. Sounds like jmwking was a much better English student in high school than I was.

If we were studying something I was interested in (Antigone, The Iliad, The Odyssey, Julius Caesar, Romeo and Juliet, Macbeth, Hamlet, Animal Farm, Catch-22, The Old Man and the Sea, Moby Dick, The Pearl, Crime and Punishment, Fahrenheit 451, 1984, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer, A Tale of Two Cities, Oliver Twist, A Christmas Carol, The Call of the Wild), I could often get A's.

However, if we were studying something I was not at all interested in (The Scarlet Letter, Wuthering Heights, Jane Eyre, Pride and Prejudice, Ethan Frome), I would be lucky to get C's.

Vocabulary? Fuhgeddaboudit!

Disrespectful ...
 

Like I said before, while I have never charged a high school technical foul for such, I also have never ignored it, giving a stern warning every time it happens.

Kids (and coaches) today just don't know the rule, so I educate them.

"Do you know that I can charge you with a technical foul for that? Now please go and get me the ball."

Yeah, it was. It is disrespectful to think someone should go fetch a ball you tossed away from the playing court.

Can you tell me what advantage you get by not giving an official the ball during a dead ball? I literally cannot think of one. Because if you do not give the official the ball, the other team is not prevented from something. The only thing it is IMO is a disrespectful act when you throw the ball away during a dead ball as Clark did here.

Peace

All I am saying is the action that was penalized has nothing to do with an advantage. These are two different kinds of violations considered into one delay. I am talking about this because folks are focused on one part of the rule and not the other. There was no advantage to throwing the ball away, it was disrespectful. And I have given a T to players for doing stuff like this in high school games. Not common because I make a habit of not chasing any basketball even if it is close and behind me. So I tend to not have to deal with that kind of situation.

I also tend to be very direct with players when they do disrespectful stuff, especially if it is not obvious to everyone. Players tend to get the message or they fall in line. I have even had players apologize for their behavior as well. But again what Clark did was a reaction to a foul she did not like. The official was not having it and T'd her up. They did not care who she was. Good for that official.

Peace

Complex Compound Sentence ...
 

I agree with you.

My point was that one could possibly read this complex compound sentence, with multiple clauses, in a different way.

It probably could be written better, and I believe that chapmaja and jmwking may agree with me.

That's great. But the reason for the technical foul was explained by the crew chief after the game. Whatever the grammar police want to charge doesn't change the understanding of the rule by those who adjudicate it.

Keep Your Eyes On The Players ...
 

Same here. Our former local interpreter used to say to keep your eyes on the players, never get a ball, it always comes back to you, and that he never lost a basketball in a game.

I almost lost a basketball this past year. It somehow disappeared after a call was made. I asked the players, "Wheres' the ball?". They didn't know. A parent yelled from the bleachers that the ball rolled out an open gym door. I looked into doorway and saw classrooms with open doors and a downstairs stairwell. No way was I making a trek to find that ball. I asked the coach for a new ball and she said that it must be somewhere. She did find it. It hadn't left the gym, as the parent claimed, but rolled, hidden, behind a trash can near the door.

Purpose And Intent ...
 

Agree. Purpose and intent.

I've only seen it once...when I was in high school in the mid 90s.

T calls a foul in the backcourt and goes to report. L is standing near midcourt, on opposite side from table and is clearly asking for the ball from a player who is holding it behind his back probably 10 feet away. They have a short conversation and at the end of it, the player just drops the ball (while it's still behind his back) and it bounces away from both of them.