violation negates shot

[rcwilco]

amazing what reading the rule book does .....I was not aware of a violation that could cancel a basket. Casebook 9.13.1 ball released on a try, while ball is in air another player on team A excessivly swings arms, ball goes through and basket is good. violation, do not count basket, go the other way. Always something new.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by rcwilco
amazing what reading the rule book does .....I was not aware of a violation that could cancel a basket. Casebook 9.13.1 ball released on a try, while ball is in air another player on team A excessivly swings arms, ball goes through and basket is good. violation, do not count basket, go the other way. Always something new.

Not new.

This was in the book last year, too.

[Camron Rust]

This only became an issue last year as far as I can tell.

Once the ball is in flight, the only violations that can be commited by the shooting team are BI, GT, and swinging of the elbows. In the past, it was obvious and equitable that BI and GT would cancel the basket. For the elbows, there would be no actual penalty if the bucket is allowed.

[rcwilco]

I knew that swinging the elbvows was now a violation I just did not connect that it could take away a basket. I know it may seem obvious just never made the connection.

[Frankie]

....But what about contact with A2's swinging elbow on B2 while ball is in the air on A1 shot?

Tweet...basket good and foul to A2. Ball to B for throw in or bonus. Is this correct as per NCAA?

[David B]

What makes it even harder to understand though is that if you have the same play, but for some crazy reason B2 is swinging the elbows, then you allow the basket, and penalize the violation.

So it depends on who is doing the swinging.

The good thing is that you're probably not going to have many guys swinging elbows while a shot is in the air.

Thanks
David

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Frankie
....But what about contact with A2's swinging elbow on B2 while ball is in the air on A1 shot?

Tweet...basket good and foul to A2. Ball to B for throw in or bonus. Is this correct as per NCAA?

Yes -- it's the same as any other foul by A when the ball is in flight on a try.

[SamIAm]

Bob,
Do I understand this correctly:
Swing elbows violation negates a basket unless those same swinging elbows make contact. Then you get to count the basket and call foul.

[JeffTheRef]

Originally posted by SamIAm
Bob,
Do I understand this correctly:
Swing elbows violation negates a basket unless those same swinging elbows make contact. Then you get to count the basket and call foul.

we may well have a good basket and a technical foul for fighting, ejection from game.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by JeffTheRef

we may well have a good basket and a technical foul for fighting, ejection from game.

The contact with the elbow happened during a live ball. By rule,it then has to be a personal foul of some type, not a technical foul. The only way that you can end up with an ejection in this case is if you call the elbow contact a flagrant personal foul. Hitting someone with an elbow doesn't really fit the definition of "fighting".

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by SamIAm
Bob,
Do I understand this correctly:
Swing elbows violation negates a basket unless those same swinging elbows make contact. Then you get to count the basket and call foul.

Yes.

[JeffTheRef]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

The contact with the elbow happened during a live ball. By rule,it then has to be a personal foul of some type, not a technical foul. The only way that you can end up with an ejection in this case is if you call the elbow contact a flagrant personal foul. Hitting someone with an elbow doesn't really fit the definition of "fighting".

JR, you're right about the flagrant personal . . .no question . . you're wrong about the fighting. Anybody throws an elbow hard and makes contact, that's not just an intentional personal, it's flagrant and they're out. To do otherwise is to invite mayhem.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by JeffTheRef

you're wrong about the fighting. Anybody throws an elbow hard and makes contact, that's not just an intentional personal, it's flagrant and they're out. To do otherwise is to invite mayhem.
[/B]

Who said it was an intentional personal foul? As written above, I said that if you ejected someone, it had to be a flagrant personal foul. Rule 4-19-4 backs that up completely. If you wanna call that flagrant personal foul for throwing an elbow "fighting", be my guest. I wouldn't. Imo, the elbow could be a flagrant act, but if I did call it that, I would never call that particular flagrant act "fighting". I'd call it a "deliberate attempt to injure". I save "fighting" for someone that actually throws a punch or tries to kick somebody.

Btw, riddle me this,Batman:
Rule 4-18-1 Fighting- " Fighting includes...an attempt to strike,punch or kick an opponent with a fist,hands,arms,legs or feet regardless of whether contact is made".
So,by the above rule,if a player throws a punch and it misses,you can call it "fighting", charge the player with a flagrant foul,and then eject him. My question to you now is- "if a player throws an elbow that misses, are you still going to call this "fighting" and then eject him for it? Please check out R9-13-1Penalty before you answer.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Dec 5th, 2003 at 08:49 PM]