I was doing a middle school game in a small gym with the fans right along the sidelines. There was a loose ball along the sideline and the ball hit a fan's shoe, which was clearly in bounds when it hit. There was no crazy deflection and I kept the ball in play as if it had hit me. Did I get the call right, and where can I get a NFHS ruling on this?

It doesn't really matter.

The fan caused the ball to be OOB. He is "any other person" considered as an object on or outside a boundary line (actulaay he was both). Rule 7-2(b).

Technically - wrong as described above. Unless the fan is complaetely on the court, they had OOB position so the ball was OOB when it struck the fan.

From a game managment perspective, given the tight quarters especially, to keep playing since it didn't impact the play seems to be a good call. Players should be able to reasonably play the game as it was meant to be played, and hitting a fan's shoe is not something they consciously trying to avoid (unlike the boundary itself or the ref, who is a constant and expected presence). And keeping it going if it was the visiting team and a home fan, or vice versa, really helps avoid a potentially troublesome situation.

By the way, did anybody from either team argue about the non-call? did anybody even notice?

Fan interference. I think we have to keep the fans off the court, even if that means they move up the bleachers. This time it was the ball, next time maybe a player gets tripped. Excluding a fast break situation, I would stop the game and correct the situation so it doesn't happen again.

I disagree with part of this statement. "completely" Fans are not allowed on the court. Not even a Toe. If a fan is on the court, you don't have a oob situation, you have fan interference.

Bart
The only reference I find to fan interference is here. It does not really apply to this situation, although it would if a fan were totally on the court trying to interfere. But I think the discretion clause in this rule definitely rules out penalizing a team for the foot in a situation where there is no room for spectators.

Rule 2
SECTION 8 OFFICIALS' ADDITIONAL DUTIES
The officials shall:
ART. 1 . . . Penalize unsporting conduct by any player, coach, substitute, team attendant or follower.
NOTE: The home management or game committee is responsible for spectator behavior, insofar as it can reasonably be expected to control the spectators. The officials may call fouls on either team if its supporters act in such a way as to interfere with the proper conduct of the game. Discretion must be used in calling such fouls, however, lest a team be unjustly penalized.


Now I agree that if the foot in question didn't jump back in reaction to what happened on this play, you may need to deal with the fan to get them completely off the court. My ASSumption (we all know about those :) ) was that this fan would react like most and pull his/her foot off the court after it was hit by the ball. If they do pull back, no reason to stop play, IMO.

My point is, you are saying it not fan interference unless the whole body is in the playing area. I'm saying it does not matter how much of the boby is in the playing area. This fan DID interfere with play, the ball hit his foot. By your ruling, he is oobs and we give the ball to the other team. Hmmm I don't think so. I'm not going with a T. But, I will address the situation with game mgmt.

If all the fan was doing was just sitting in the first row of a gym with little or no room on the sidelines and the fan made no effort to intentionally touch the ball with the foot, you do NOT have fan interference (do not go looking for weird things), you have an out-of-bounds play. The team that last touched the ball before the ball touched the fan caused the ball to go out-of-bounds. This is not a play on situation. A out-of-bounds violation has occured.

Why dignify the foot?
 

and penalize a team unnecessarily? If the foot is 'accidental', why not just live with the consequences and speak to the fan when you get a chance? If the ball stays in, play on. If it goes out, it goes out.

Re: Why dignify the foot?
 

The fan is sitting out-of-bounds. The ball touched a person or thing that was out-of-bounds, therefore an out-of-bound violation has occured.

Re: Re: Why dignify the foot?
 

No, Why did you say it touch oob? The post clearly said the foot inbounds. If that isn't fan interference then what is fan interference? The intent on the fan does not matter.

Mark
Situation: A violation occurred. It involved an non-participant. It affected the contest in no manner whatsoever. No advantage gained or lost by either team.

Answer: Ignore the violation. Fix the participant if necessary (they usually are self correcting on these things).

Re: Re: Why dignify the foot?
 

You're kidding, right? The fan is sitting out of bounds? Or I'm kidding, right? Inbibe of the spirit of the rules. The rules did not contemplate this circumstance. Try saying to yourself "I didn't shoot a policeman, I shot a foot."

Did this foot have a leg attached to it or are we talking about some kind of freaky Harry Potter stuff here???

I go with OOB.

Rock'n Ref

No where in the original post does it indicate that there was a foot in the shoe. Assume for a minute that there was an EMPTY fan's shoe on the court. Now what do you have?

Got a court with some bizarre unexplained bump in it and no call.

A1, in the backcourt, passes the ball to A2, who leaps from the frontcourt to catch the ball. In midair, A2's shoe comes off and lands in the backcourt near the divisional line. The ball hits the shoe and bounces to A3 who fouled in the act of shooting a successful 3-point shot.

Let's see how a strict constructionist might adjudicate these circumstances. The shoe, being a non-viable subset of a player, is not where it is, in the backcourt but rather still in the front court, as A1 has not landed at the time the ball strikes the shoe.

The seat-of-the-pants approach is to pretend the shoe NEVER EXISTED for game purposes, toss it to the kid, and mutter, "put this effing thing on and learn to tie it!"

I am just flabbergasted that how this play can be nothing more or less than an out-of-bounds violation by the player who lasted touched the ball before the ball hit a spectator who is sitting in the first row. Let restate my post of Jan. 23, 2004, 09:17pm:

If all the fan was doing was just sitting in the first row of a gym with little or no room on the sidelines and the fan made no effort to intentionally touch the ball with the foot, you do NOT have fan interference (do not go looking for weird things), you have an out-of-bounds play. The team that last touched the ball before the ball touched the fan caused the ball to go out-of-bounds. This is not a play on situation. A out-of-bounds violation has occured.


Do not try to make something out of nothing.

Mark, we all use a browser to surf this site.

We saw what you wrote on Friday.

There's absolutely no need to re-state it.

If people didn't believe you the first time, they aren't going to change their mind just because you know how to copy and paste.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jan 25th, 2004 at 06:20 PM]

OOB is appropriate here. You're lucky the ball took a normal hop, otherwise you'd have to explain the ball going crazy 'in-bounds'.

I have done games where the bleachers were right up to the sideline and in other cases that all they had for seating for the parents were folding chairs right up to the line.

Who Throws a shoe? Honestly!

If I remember right, there is a play pic about a photographer being on the court and interfering. The ruling was OOB and taking his press credentials! I believe that this is a very similar situation.