|
Interfering With The Ball ...
Green Team is trailing by four points in the fourth period when they score a three-point goal to cut the lead to one point. They are out of timeouts and have not been issued any of the five delay warnings during the game. As the ball passes through the net, there are less than five seconds remaining on the clock when Green #10 interferes with the ball.
What is the correct ruling on this play? What if the “interference” is tapping the ball away as it about to fall on Green #10's head? What if the “interference” is tapping the ball to a nearby official? What if the “interference” is tapping the ball to nearby White #15? What if the “interference” is slapping the ball in a random direction from inbounds to out of bounds? What if the “interference” is slapping the ball three rows up into the bleachers in the corner? What's the "line in the sand" between interfering with the ball and preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play? 9.2.10 SITUATION A: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1's hands. Team B has not been warned previously for a throw-in plane infraction. RULING: B1 is charged with a technical foul and it also results in the official having a team warning recorded and reported to the head coach. COMMENT: In situations with the clock running and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic. |
If White team is trying to put the ball in play, then issue a T. If White team is content to let the clock run out, then ignore the "interference." Benefit of the doubt to option B.
|
I said 'Let the clock expire. Interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored.' Even if the Green Team player throws it 3 rows into the bleachers.
If you issue a Technical foul, then Team A has to try to make Free Throws and has the Throw-in at the division line. Now, with less than 5 seconds on the game clock, the Green Team has a chance to intercept the ball and try for a goal. Or maybe Team A commits a foul. Now the Green Team has a Throw-in. DO NOT give the Green team a chance to win! Ignore the interference, let the clock run out. Team A wins and the officials get to go home. I know my ruling is different than IAABO's ruling |
Let The Clock Run ...
Quote:
I can't wait for IAABO to explain their ruling. |
If they throw the ball into the stands you have to address it, which is with an unsporting technical foul. It isn't ideal, but not everything is perfect. Short of that, I'm ignoring, because throw-in team really doesn't want to throw in the ball.
Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk |
IAABO Interpretation ...
Quote:
What a "wishy washy" interpretation? IAABO Correct Response: Assess an unsporting technical foul to Green #10 IAABO Commentary This is one of the more interesting plays that occurred recently. The answer to this play summary is multi-faceted, so please do not get hung up on the "correct response" listed above, as there are many complicating factors. There is a key point we wish to make as to why we selected the response that we did. Our role as IAABO clinicians is to help officials learn the nuances of the rules to help them when they face similar situations. Here are the key points to applying the rules on this play and in similar situations when there are greater than 5 seconds remaining in the game: Ignoring the Infraction By far, the best way to rule on this play would be to ignore the infraction, allow the clock to run, and let the game conclude. This season, the NFHS took a long-standing interpretation and added it to the rule book as follows: In situations with the clock running and five seconds or less are left on the game clock, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock (NFHS 9-2-10 Note) This is more than ample rules support to have addressed the situation we see in the clip in this manner. |
Quote:
Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Egregious Action ...
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Acceptable Choices ...
Quote:
1) Ignore. The clock just winds downs and the game ends. 2) Player technical foul for preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play. White Team gets two free throws by their best free throw shooter and then gets the ball back forty-two feet away from Green's basket with four seconds left on the game clock. Totally unacceptable: 3) Delay warning to Green team for in interfering with the ball. White gets the ball back with four seconds (run the endline) left on the game clock, a few feet away from Green's basket. |
There is also the option of letting the clock run out and assessing the technical foul at 0:00. This both denies Green the advantage of stopping the clock and penalizes the responsible player with a technical foul (which would only matter if it's their second or if the state suspends for accumulated technical fouls.)
Of course, when in IAABO country, do as the IAABO do. |
Why would 4 seconds be on the clock if the score came at or below the 5 second mark and the ball was tossed into the stands? It would take a couple of seconds for the official to react, blow his whistle, and the timer to stop the clock.
Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk |
The Final Countdown (Europe, 1986) ......
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:26pm. |