Grasp Ring to avoid injury

[ridavis13]

Defender B4 attempts to stop an apparent lob pass. While B4 is airborne, A3 moves beneath B4. To avoid injury, B4 grasps the basket ring. While B4 grasps the ring, A1 shoots from about 12 feet away. Just after A1 releases the shot, B4 lets go of the ring and lands safely. The ring is still moving when the ball hits it and bounces out. How should you rule?
A. Award 2 free throws to team A, give team A the ball at the division line and count the basket;
B. Count the basket only.
C. Count the basket and charge the head coach of team B with a direct technical foul;
D. Count the basket and charge the head coach of team B with an indirect technical .

[Hawks Coach]

What's with the quiz thing? Kind of an odd way to join the board.

[Back In The Saddle]

You should rule calmly yet decisively.

[nine01c]

I say B. Then Team B can run the endline for throw-in from the endline (awarded basket).

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by ridavis13
Defender B4 attempts to stop an apparent lob pass. While B4 is airborne, A3 moves beneath B4. To avoid injury, B4 grasps the basket ring. While B4 grasps the ring, A1 shoots from about 12 feet away. Just after A1 releases the shot, B4 lets go of the ring and lands safely. The ring is still moving when the ball hits it and bounces out. How should you rule?
A. Award 2 free throws to team A, give team A the ball at the division line and count the basket;
B. Count the basket only.
C. Count the basket and charge the head coach of team B with a direct technical foul;
D. Count the basket and charge the head coach of team B with an indirect technical .

If there was any contact at all between A3 and B4, call the illegal screen, and either give the ball to B, or go to the other end and shoot 1-&-1 or two.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by rainmaker

If there was any contact at all between A3 and B4, call the illegal screen, and either give the ball to B, or go to the other end and shoot 1-&-1 or two.

I'm with you on this. The sitch, which is directly from the new NFHS interps, is obviously trying to make a point about the moving ring contacting the try being BI. However, if a player moves underneath an airborne opponent, and causes so much contact that the opponent has to grasp the ring to avoid injury, we're almost certainly going to have a foul call. I don't think we'll get much disagreement on that.

But let's change the situation slightly. Let's say that B4 was airborne in an attempt to block A1's try when the foul by A3 occurs. Then the moving ring contacts the ball. How does that change the penalty?

[nine01c]

The original play does not mention anything about contact.
It sounds to me like B4 grabbed the ring so he wouldn't land on A3 who moved into his landing spot. By the time he came down, A3 was gone and B4 landed safely. If there was contact during the play, then foul on A3. If there is no contact, then no foul.

However, if there WAS a foul, then there is no correct answer to choose from.

[Mark Dexter]

On a related subject . . . .

I had a similar play come up during camp this summer. I didn't see it (as I was L at the time), but I discussed the situation with my partners for the next game - we had very different responses.



A1 goes up for a dunk. Ball bounces high off the rim, and A1 grabs the ring to prevent injury. While A1 is still holding the rim, the ball drops back down through. Coach B goes balistic, wanting a BI call - I explain that I didn't see it, but if A1 was grabbing the rim, he'd be right. In discussing it before the next game (with a different crew), my partners said they wouldn't call the BI because A1 was protecting himself. My justification - it's still BI because there's no protection exception for contacting the rim/basket.

Any other thoughts?

[nine01c]

I agree with you. If this is not BI, the rule would have to specify that there is no BI if a player is grabbing the rim to prevent injury (Rule 4-6-1). There is no such exception. Easier for the referees-they don't have to judge intent.

[Bobby]

Just for reference:

NBA Rule 12, Section IV - Basket Ring, Backboard, Support:

b. A defensive player who deliberately hangs on his opponent's basket ring, net, backboard or support shall be assessed an unsportsmanlike technical foul. If he touches the ball during a field goal attempt, points shall be awarded consistent with the type of shot.

EXCEPTION: An offensive or defensive player may hang on the basket ring, backboard or support to prevent an injury to himself or another player, with no technical foul assessed.

c. Should a defensive player deliberately hang on the basket ring, backboard or support to successfully touch a ball which is in possession of an opponent, an unsportsmanlike technical foul shall be assessed.

(NOTE: Section 5-c of this same rule states a technical foul called for (1) delay of game, (2) coaches box violations, (3) defensive 3-seconds, or (4) having a team total of less or more than five players when the ball is alive, or (5) an offensive player hanging on his basket ring or backboard, is not considered an act of unsportsmanlike conduct, and cannot be charged towards disqualification.)

If there is no contact, charge basket interference and put in the two or three points. The hanging on the rim is legal in this situation because of preventing injury.

This is different than FIBA's Article 49:
49.1.2 It is a technical foul when a player disregards warnings by officials or uses tactics such as . . .

Hanging on the ring in such a way that the weight of the player is supported by the ring.
In a dunking situation, a player may:
− Grasp the ring momentarily and incidentally.
− Hang on the ring if, in the judgement of the official, he is trying to prevent injury to himself or to another player.

Article 49 states it is only if it is in a dunking situation. NBA Rule 12 does not have the same.

[nine01c]

Most people who participate on this forum referee NFHS and/or NCAA (mens or womens) rules. Although comparing other codes can be of interest to some, it doesn't really help in interpreting the rules we are trying to master. Sometimes these interpretations and penalties will be exactly the same, but sometimes they differ greatly, especially in the NBA code.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter
On a related subject . . . .

I had a similar play come up during camp this summer. I didn't see it (as I was L at the time), but I discussed the situation with my partners for the next game - we had very different responses.



A1 goes up for a dunk. Ball bounces high off the rim, and A1 grabs the ring to prevent injury. While A1 is still holding the rim, the ball drops back down through. Coach B goes balistic, wanting a BI call - I explain that I didn't see it, but if A1 was grabbing the rim, he'd be right. In discussing it before the next game (with a different crew), my partners said they wouldn't call the BI because A1 was protecting himself. My justification - it's still BI because there's no protection exception for contacting the rim/basket.

Any other thoughts?

Look at the interps on the website.
Here's how the NFHS wants this play called:
SITUATION 15: Defender B4 att-empts to stop an apparent lob pass near the basket. While B4 is airborne, A3 moves beneath B4. To avoid injury, B4 grasps the basket ring. While B4 grasps the ring, A1 shoots from about 12 feet away. Just after A1 releases the shot, B4 lets go of the ring and lands safely. The ring is still moving when (a) the ball hits the moving ring and bounces in; or (b) the ball enters and passes completely through the basket, without contacting the moving ring. RULING: Since B4 grasped the ring to prevent injury, no technical foul is called. In (a), when the ball contacts the moving ring, basket interference is called on B4; the ball is dead and the try cannot score, but A1 is awarded two points. In (b), since the ball entered and passed completely through the basket without touching the ring, basket interference has not occurred; play continues. (9-11-4; 4-6-4; 10-3-5 Exc)

In summary, if the ball hits the ring it is BI, if it goes through without contacting the ring, play on.

[Edited by Nevadaref on Nov 16th, 2003 at 05:33 PM]

[rainmaker]

None of this makes any difference if there was any contact at all. I say, watch for the contact. It saves a mess of explaining!

[ridavis13]

The original question did not involve any contact between B4 and A3. We have a defensive player grasping the ring to avoid injury. His grasping of the ring causes the ring to vibrate and the ring is moving when the shot hits the ring and bounces out. I would have BI and count the basket only.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by ridavis13
The original question did not involve any contact between B4 and A3. We have a defensive player grasping the ring to avoid injury. His grasping of the ring causes the ring to vibrate and the ring is moving when the shot hits the ring and bounces out. I would have BI and count the basket only.

Be careful how you phrase it. The mere fact that the ring is vibrating does not make it BI. The new rule is very specific. The ball has to hit the ring before it has returned to its original position. That means the horizontal plane that it was in before being pulled down into the break away position. I don't think that this rule even applies to non-breakaway rims.
Once it springs back, you have nothing to call even if the ball hits the ring while it is still shaking or vibrating from the grasping.