Slapping the backboard, redux

[ChuckElias]

Last night, NCAA game, 2-whistle. My partner is very good, very experienced, has a reputation for letting 'em play. We had a fine game, worked well together, and were done in an hour and a half, exactly. Anywho. . .

Second half, 20-point lead for the home team, although that's not really relevant. I'm Trail when home team shoots from the low block, just inside the paint. Visitor makes great attempt at the ball, clearly trying to block it, but just misses. He contacts the backboard, causing it to shake slightly. The ball hits the rim and bounces out, probably b/c of the shake.

I have nothing.

Home bench, of course , wants the basket. Crowd, of course, wants the basket. But there was no question that the defender was playing the ball. It was not a showboat move, not intentional. I have nothing.

During our post-game, my partner says, "It might not be the rule, but I think you could've satisfied everybody by calling BI or GT or whatever on that play. Nobody would complain, b/c everybody saw the slap."

We discuss what the rule really is (T if intentional), but he really seemed to think that placating everybody was the best move in this situation.

I disagreed, but didn't argue about it. I just wish this misperception would disappear. It's so frustrating to me, for some reason.

Just thought I'd throw it out there.

[cmathews]

I agree with ya Chuck....similar but different situation a couple weeks ago...high school 2 whistle game. Semi fast break for the visitors, home team kid (by the way there is no one on either team who has the ability to block a layup unless they get it when the kid is bringing it up) intentionally slaps the board...Im trail, I have the T, home coach doesn't like it says to me "I could see it if he missed the shot but he made it...." another misconception... BTW I don't think it would be a bad idea for the committees to put a BI provision in there for shaking the rim.....

[MN 3 Sport Ref]

Originally posted by cmathews
I agree with ya Chuck....similar but different situation a couple weeks ago...high school 2 whistle game. Semi fast break for the visitors, home team kid (by the way there is no one on either team who has the ability to block a layup unless they get it when the kid is bringing it up) intentionally slaps the board...Im trail, I have the T, home coach doesn't like it says to me "I could see it if he missed the shot but he made it...." another misconception... BTW I don't think it would be a bad idea for the committees to put a BI provision in there for shaking the rim.....

I agree that the best thing here would be a rules change to include BI/GT for something of this nature. The defense is gaining a clear advantage by causing the backboard/ring to vibrate. The offense when unintentional is not severe enough to access a T obviously but IMO it would be fair play to count the basket if it is obvious in the officials opinion that it would have had a good chance of going in without the tap.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by cmathews
I...BTW I don't think it would be a bad idea for the committees to put a BI provision in there for shaking the rim.....

Originally posted by MN3
... agree that the best thing here would be a rules change to include BI/GT for something of this nature....

Although it seems somewhat reasonable and obvious that the defense has disruppted the location of the rim/backboard, I don't think a rule change is appropriate.

I assume that you are wanting to change the rule and award 2 points if the basket shakes. Don't forget that the basket is shaking as the result of a legitimate defensive attempt.

Goal tending is not legitimate. We have appropriate rules for that - 2 point award.
Intentionally or incidentally interfering with a ball that is about to drop through the net is not legitimate. Again, we have appropriate rules for BI - 2 points or no points depending upon who did it.
Showboating by slapping the backboard is not a legitimate defensive attempt. Again, rules are in place, T-bone and ball back. This is surely the most severe of the above penalties.

I really think the answer is to educate our fellow officials so they penalize non-legitimate acts and so that they allow legitimate defensive acts. The problem isn't one of rules; it is one of officials assessing the wrong penalty (basket interference). They have essentially educated the public of an incorrect penalty. Now coaches scream for BI. Fans think the officials are nuts because they let an obvious BI go unpunished.... well it wasn't BI and myself, knowing the rules correctly, can't penalize for legitimate play.

Sorry, fans. Sorry, coaches.

[SamIAm]

Tony, I agree with your last paragraph. But I don't like the logic of proving a rule change is not appropriate based on a playing being legitimate or not because of a rule. The legitimacy itself would be in question with a rule change.

Regarless of that circular comment,
On an attempt to block a try that is on its way down, defensive play swings and misses and the backboard is slapped/hit then it was not a legitimate defensive attempt. The try then bounces out due to the basket shaking. No penalty. My point being, the backboard may be slapped in an unlegitimate or legitimate way with the ball bouncing out of the basket.

[cmathews]

Tony,
I don't think that an attempt to block that shakes the rim hard enough to knock the ball out is any longer legit. I think that shaking the rim enough to knock the ball out should be a penalty, I agree with everything else you said, it needs to be called correctly. For crying out loud it is BI to touch the net while the ball is in the cylinder I don't think that shaking the rim should be any different..