NF rules. A1 passes the ball to A2. The ball deflects off A2 and heads toward the sideline. The ball bounces inbounds and as the ball then is in the air over the OOB area, A2 tries to jump from inbounds to tap it back before it (or he) touches anything OOB and it appears that he will be able to do this successfully. However, while A2 is in the air and reaching for the ball, coach B (who is legally standing in his box OOB) grabs the ball.

What's your call?

Hmm... very interesting. Options, and next play:

1) delay of game warning, and A's ball
2) delay of game technical foul, and obvious...
3) violation on B, A's ball

My choice is 2.

option 4) violation on team A.

Ok, I'll give this a try.

A's ball at the spot of the illegal touch.

NFHS Rules Book '02-'03 - 7-2-Art 1 & 2

Don't think these rules apply. Player = the 10 legal players on the court.

Any other reference for us here?

Where is the penalty stated for such an action in the rule book?

I couldn't find it. I was just givin it a shot as I stated.

I vote for Option 2.

Like you said no penalty in the rule book. Sooo option 4

The ball is still inbounds while it was over the OOB plane. This is no different than a ball bouncing on the floor inbounds and A1 going for it, when the Coach B reaches through the OOB plane from OOB and then touches the ball. He has interfered with a live ball.

Unless a case play is cited, under 2-3, a T shall be called.

AKA, option 2.

Soooooooo......

Using your same logic, it's a T if the ball hits the coach while he's sitting on the bench? :confused:

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Feb 5th, 2004 at 07:31 PM]

When it is out of bounds, and within his box, the coach can touch it. It's in his area. What if it were to brush against his leg, i don't think a T would be warrented there.

The ball is out of bounds when it touches something that is out of bounds. Whether it be the scorer's table, the floor, the wall, an official or a coach. If the ball is coming towards him while he is in his coaching box, he has the right to grab it.

As long as he doesn't interfere with the ball while it is still inbounds, or outside of his coaching box.

As long as he doesn't interfere with the ball while it is still inbounds...

Isn't the ball still inbounds until it touches something out of bounds?

I think i phrased that wrong. I should have said that he can touch it once it passes the out of bounds plane and into his coaching box.

Although i can't find a rule to support this, i might be wrong.

Option 4 it is.

B's ball.

Yeah, and that something is coach B.

The difference is that in Mark's exmaple, Coach B made an effort to touch the ball. I don't care if he's in his coaching box. The ball hitting the coach in not an intentional act.

IOW, Coach B deliberately acted to interfere with A's bonified attempt to recover a live, inbounds ball.

Technical foul (aka option 2).

What if A2 could tip it back to A3, near the sideline and with no other player nearby to intercept the ball, and A is down by 1 with 7 seconds to go?

Do you mean "bona fide" attempt? Man, I would hate to see anyone get bonified - and certainly not in front of an entire gym full of people.

What difference does it make if the B coach tries to catch the ball, or he just let's it hit him? If he catches the ball while he's sitting on the bench, hasn't he committed the exact same act- catching a live, inbounds ball? Are you gonna T him up for doing that too?

Do you have a rules citation that will back your T call up? Do you also have a rule citation that will negate R7-2-1( a ball is caused to go OOB by the last player inbounds to touch it) and R7-1-2(the ball is OOB when it touches any other person on or outside a boundary). Those are pretty specific rules.

They should have been up by 1 with 7 seconds to go.

When the ball goes on the oob side to the line, and it touches a coach (i.e. coach grabs it) it is oob by the player who last touched it while the ball had inbound status.

I most definetely do mean "bona fide". :D :D

I thought that I didn't know the proper spelling to that word while I was typing it in, but relied on my spelling instincts.

The only person that I know that keeps a dictionary near his computer is JR. ;)

Luckily half time ended before they got to the bonifying.

This makes no sense. No more than saying A should have been up by 40 so that it makes no difference.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bart Tyson

Quote:

When the ball goes on the oob side to the line, and it touches a coach (i.e. coach grabs it) it is oob by the player who last touched it while the ball had inbound status.

I'm going to pass this on then to all the coaches in my area. Tell them that they or a person on their bench should interfere with a play where an actual player is trying to decide the outcome of the game. Oh, what a novel idea that is. :O

I'll even make it a POE that the coach can even stretch himself, while in the c-box, into the inbounds side of the sideline plane if A touched it last to guarantee his team possession of the ball.

But then again, both coaches will be doing it, so we're all even steven.

There's nothing about a coach intentionally interferring with live play that is basketball. Nothing.

Extend the situation... say Coach B stretches across the sideline.

What makes the most sense is that the official makes a judgement call. (Cuz you know, we do that from time to time in a game.) If the official judged that the ball became dead by virtue of being out of bounds because of an intentional act by a non-player, with an opposing player able to make a play on the ball, then we have a technical foul.

OK....but did he did this in this sitch?

In this case, what I feel is more important is the effect. In both cases, a player has a chance to make a play on the ball, but wes denied that opportunity.

OK...now what if the ball hit the bench before A1 had a chance to save it? How is this different?

1) The coaching box is a privilege that the rules allow.

2) The coaching box is for the Head Coach to coach his
players, not chew an officials tuchus.

3) The coaching box does not give the Head Coach a free
pass to interfere with play.

4) The Head Coach must be aware of where the ball is and to
attempt to get out of the way of the ball and the players
if they come near his coaching box. It is one thing for
a Head Coach to catch the ball when he is in his coaching
box when it comes at him and there is no possibility of a
player making a play for the ball; this is nothing more
than a out-of-bounds violation by the team that caused
the ball to go out-of-bounds. But in Mark's posted play
Coach B interfered with play. If a Head Coach interfers
with play while in his coaching box, his actions are a
technical foul for unsportsmanlike conduct.

Hey Mark, it's TUCHUS, not tuckus

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tuchus

And the rest of your post is wrong too.

Oy vey, what a mensch I am. Thanks for the spelling correction.

And before you make a blanket condemination of my post, why don't you address each of my points and give reasons why I am wrong.

In the 2002 YBOA Girls' National Championship, I saw a coach receive a well deserved technical foul for interfering with a throw-in while still in his coaching box. The coach did not attempt to touch the ball, instead he jumped up with his arms held high to block the view of the thrower who was trying to throw a pass to a wide open teammate under her basket.

Dan, I can see by the rules, that you are probably correct. But I'm having trouble swallowing it. Why isn't it unsportsmanlike for a coach to deliberately interfere with play?

The benches are where they are because the alternative is to orient them some other way, which is inefficient. Elements like cost (as a function of the size of the gym) quickly rise when we want 10 feet of unobstructed space on one sideline. We all know that that will not happen.

The bench does not have arms or legs that will protrude to touch the ball before the ball touches it.

The bench cannot think and realize that if I touch the ball, my team will get it. (It would need a brain and at least one extremity.)

And if it could, the bench cannot respond to my technical foul call. (It would need a mouth, or if the one extremity it had was an arm with a hand and a finger, it could show me his middle finger.)

This is different because of intent.

WI State Tournament
 

Something very close to Mark's scenario occurred at the Wisconsin Boys State Tournament held at Madison a couple years ago. I don't recall the exact details, but a head coach interfered with a live ball (can't remember if he kicked or just grabbed it). I do believe he ended up receiving a T.

Hopefully some WI officials on this board may have a better recall of this.

Something very close to Mark's scenario occurred at the Wisconsin Boys State Tournament held at Madison a couple years ago. I don't recall the exact details, but a head coach interfered with a live ball (can't remember if he kicked or just grabbed it). I do believe he ended up receiving a T.

Hopefully some WI officials on this board may have a better recall of this.

It depends. ;)

The greater the likelihood of A getting to the ball, the greater the chance for the T.

The "more intentional" the act (or inaction -- intentionally remaining in the way) on the coach, the greater the likelihood for the T. (IOW, if he acts in instinct to catch a ball that's headed for his head, I'd likely not give a T; if he reaches to the side, I'd be more likely to do so.)

So, I could have:

1) A violation on A -- there was no chance to get the ball; the coach's actions didn't affect play

2) The ball back to A -- the coach's actions affected play, but were unintentional*

3) T on Coach B -- intentionally interfered with play.

* Take this similar, if unlikely, play: A 1 throws a baseball pass the length of the court toward A2. While the ball is in the air, one of the "climbing ropes" used for PE class comes loose and dangles over the court. The ball hits the rope. Sure, by rule, the ball hit an object OOB, so it should be a violation on A. But, since the oject wasn't there when the game started, couldn't be foreseen, etc., I'm just having a "do-over."

So then let us change this up a bit. Same situation, coach in same area, but this time the coach reaches out and tips the ball away from A right before they are going to grab it. You still have OOB on A?? That is not unsportsmanlike?? I'll have to remember that for our game tonight.

Although this won't really help most of us, the NBA addresses this specifically. From the Q & A, page 16:

Notice Team B is awarded the ball even tho B1 is the last player to touch the ball inbounds.

And before you make a blanket condemination of my post, why don't you address each of my points and give reasons why I am wrong.

[/B][/QUOTE]OK, you are wrong because you can't post any rules that will negate the language of R7-2-1 and R7-1-2(b), or that will specifically back up your contention that it's an automatic T. A generic "unsporting act" under R10-4-1 is strictly in the eye of the beholder- and not all beholders agree with you.

This type of play isn't covered in the rules. I can agree with others that I really don't like the idea of what the coach is doing in this sitch, but just because I don't like it doesn't mean that I have the right to ignore rules that are already present.

If this is an obvious (this means most others in the gym see it this way) deliberate act to grab the ball so it could not be played. I am going to hit him with unsporting T. Otherwise, B's ball.

Another option, just say A's ball. If asked, just reply, "I thought your player had the last touch." Then we move on.

This is the post that I most agree with.

I have some other thoughts on this situation:

Either A2 failed to catch the pass from his teammate or A1 threw a bad pass. Either way, team A is the team that caused the ball to be near the sideline in the first place. If they had executed properly, there would be no play to discuss.

Just because A2 appears to have a good chance to save the ball back inbounds, how can it be determined which team will retrieve the ball once he does?

The only thing I can't see in this situation is just to give the ball back to A. If the coach's action is unintentional, the ball is out of bounds on A, B's ball. If I judged that the coach acted intentionally to interfere with A2's play, T the coach.

I can live with this one.
Sorry coach, I may have kick the call.

The bench, like the coach, are OOB, regardless of how many moving parts, how much cognitive ability or what the intent of either is.

Because I don't see it as a deliberate act as originally posted. These things are almost always reflexive acts. And as you say by rule (except NBA apparently, thanks Chuck) the coach is innocent.

Is it possible that a coach might act in an overtly deliberate manner? Yeah. Would I rule differently if it were painfully obvious? Yeah. Do I ever expect to see such a thing...well...not really, but then until last summer I never expected to see a BI off a FT either.

Chuck:

Yes, this does help, because it establishes intent to interfere with the play. A coach who intentionally interferes with play is violating the coaching box rules and committing an unsportsmanlike technical foul. I did not think of looking at the NBA/WNBA rules myself, but if one compares the NFHS/NCAA, FIBA, and NBA/WNBA rules books, one will see that vast tracts of the rules are identical, word-for-word. Sometimes it does not look like the NBA/WNBA game is the same as the amateurs, but many times the rules and the intent are the same.

MTD, Sr.

Dan_ref:

I agree with you if the coach's action were a simple reflex action to a play that came up so quickly that he could not get out of the way. But if the coach has ample time to move out of the way of the play, but does not, and then interferes with the play, that is a technical foul on the coach.

MTD, Sr.

As a coach who also plays competitive golf I try to keep up on the rules of golf. I have always liked one of the rules they have which is the following:

1-4. Points Not Covered by Rules
If any point in dispute is not covered by the Rules, the decision should be made in accordance with equity.

I think sometimes in an effort strictly follow the rules we lose sight of the purpose. The officials and rules are there to make it a fair playing ground.

While I believe we should hold strictly to the rules in most situations. Sometimes if a situation is not covered I have no problem with an official simply using their judgement and doing whats fair.

In this sit. if the coach intentionally grabbed the ball but had his/her back to the player to save the ball and did not see them. I would simply give it to the other team.

If it was obvious that it was deliberately done to prevent the player from playing the ball. I have no problem with a technical.

I would like it decided in accordance with equity.

Amen
 

And until we get an official ruling from an official official, amen!

Ya' know - I'm kind of surprised that no one has asked what we did when this happened.

I think I am the one who brought this dead horse back to life...sorry bout that.

I would like to add though, I have been in the L and a rebound has been batted toward my head off of, say, A1 with A2 going after it, my reflexes take over. It is not intentional, but I did affect the play. Sorry, B ball.

If the coach defrects the ball to prevent injury or just pure instintinctiveness, he should not be penalized with a T. He did interfere with the overall outcome of the play, so award posession accordingly. If he intentionally grabs the ball while the opposing team is going after it, T.

Thoughts?

Hey Mark, What did you guys do when this happened?

What did you do in this situation?

Puked on his shoes?

Ah, comeon Mark, tell us. Pleeasseeee, pretty Pleeasssee

Mark, what was your call?

There was no call because I made up the scenario. I saw a ball hit a coach in the back of the head while he was standing in the box looking downcourt and wondered what I would have called if he had intentionally grabbed the ball while an opponent was trying to save it.

I posted it just to get a discussion started, since I couldn't find a definitive answer in the NF rulebook.

It has been fun, hasn't it?

Oh yeah - what would I call in this case? If I thought the coach intentionally grabbed the ball to prevent the opponent from making a play, he gets a T for unsportsmanlike conduct, since the ball was still live when he did it.

talk about taking the wind out of the sails!!!! I puke on your shoes. :)

Very clever.

Howzabout this one: in Mark's real play someone yells "Hey coach! Watch out!!" and the coach quickly turns and (ahem) intentionally (cough cough) catches the ball before it pops him in the nose, negating A1's valiant and death defying dive to save the ball.

So, what say all you good folks who would nail a coach to the wall for (ahem) intentionally interfering with this play?

There is no authority to penalize a team for making a bad pass. There is, however, authority to penalize a team for causing the ball to go out of bounds. The penalty is loss of possession. Since the two are different, there is a play to discuss. Namely, the originally written.

With your thinking, why do we discuss the philosphy behind purposely fouling to catch up in the dying minute of a game? If the losing team would have just made more baskets throughout the game, there would be no philosophy to discuss.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Andy
[B]Just because A2 appears to have a good chance to save the ball back inbounds, how can it be determined which team will retrieve the ball once he does?[B][QUOTE]

Doesn't matter. He was not afforded that opportunity. That's where the unsportsmanlike conduct enters. Team A player could have requested a timeout. She doesn't need to pass it to anyone.

You are correct - in your judgement. We as officials do that all the time. This is no different. The original post says: ...and it appears that he will be able to do this successfully...

Something like this I would have to see to rule on. For it to happen, A1 must have been near enough by that he had a chance to touch it before it hit Coach B in the back, and someone yelled early enough to allow B time to turn around and reflex a catch. If A was nearby - I might give A the ball, because of equity, JR :D or I might give B the ball. I do not believe in this case I would have a T.

Because this sitch gives more specific info than the original post, it is filling a bubble that says B grabbed the ball to prevent from being bopped in the noggin. Which is what we should be using: use your NOGGIN and BE FAIR when weird stuff happens.

I think the question here is, if not intentional by the coach, is WHO caused the ball to go out of bounds?

B's coach.

A's ball.

The same ruling must then also be applicable if B's coach is sitting on the bench and he catches a live ball thrown OOB by A, eh? Using the same logic, the B coach caused the ball to go OOB in that situation too.

I wanna be there when you call that! :D

Here is a stitch for ya then.

A1 is taking the ball out of bounds guarded by B1. A1 throws ball in across the plane, B1 tips the ball back to A1 who catches it out of bounds. Who causes bsll to be out of bounds?

A1 causes the ball to be OOB...he's a player standing OOB.

Lemme elaborate a little on RookieDude's correct answer. See rules 7-2-1 & 2. Those will tell you why A1 caused the ball to go out of bounds in your sitch above. Please note that those rules <b>only</b> apply to an individual <b>player</b>. A coach standing OOB is covered in a different rule- i.e. R7-1-2(b) as "any other person". Different rules for different situations.