was going to the arrow correct

[cc]

Shooter has 2 shots second shot gets rim but the ref blows whistle for no rim. Ball goes oob but ref under says it did get rim. They used the arrow for pos. Was this correct?

[Bart Tyson]

sounds more like the ball should be awarded to the team who was not shooting the FT. I'm picturing the ball just grazing the rim and goes directly oob. The ball is probably or at least close to being oob by the time of the whistle. Thus no player had no opertunity to rebound. And even less likly the shooting team being able to rebound.

[ref18]

Go with the arrow. In a situation like this, the ball is dead as soon as the whistle is blown. If the whistle wasn't blown someone might have had the oppertunity to rebound the ball. They did the right thing.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by cc
Shooter has 2 shots second shot gets rim but the ref blows whistle for no rim. Ball goes oob but ref under says it did get rim. They used the arrow for pos. Was this correct?

Could you elaborate more on this play? Was this a two or three person officiating crew? Which official, L or C/T, rule that the ball did not hit the rim? Which official, L or C/T, rule that the ball hit the rim?

MTD, Sr.

[JeffTheRef]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Could you elaborate more on this play? Was this a two or three person officiating crew? Which official, L or C/T, rule that the ball did not hit the rim? Which official, L or C/T, rule that the ball hit the rim?

MTD, Sr.

Inadvertent whistle, no team control, ball goes on the arrow. It's too late to kiss and make up with the other official. Assuming the whistle was blown expiditiously, it affected play.

[BktBallRef]

Here comes Mark, trying to complicate things. No, it's not the L's call. However, it doesn't matter who made the call. It's obvious that the official who made the call realized he erred or he would have stuck with his call. Team with the AP gets the ball.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Here comes Mark, trying to complicate things. No, it's not the L's call. However, it doesn't matter who made the call. It's obvious that the official who made the call realized he erred or he would have stuck with his call. Team with the AP gets the ball.

I am not trying to complicate things. I am not ridiculing the person who posted the play, but the play is poorly worded and I would not allow my student officials ask how to handle the play if one of them asked in the form that play was posted in the thread. The poster wanted to know how to handle the situation, and to give him an answer that would be credible I wanted to know how the play actually went down.


Having said what I said, I went back and re-read the post. It appears the that C/T official had ruled that the free throw had not touched the rim, and the L decided to watch the ball and thought he saw something different. The L does not have this call. If I were the C/T in this play, my ruling would stand. The shooting team's player committed a free throw violation and the shooting team's opponents get the ball for a throw-in nearest the spot of the violation. There is no need to use the AP Arrow in this play. The L has to remember to officiate his primary and to trust his partner.

MTD, Sr.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I am not trying to complicate things. I am not ridiculing the person who posted the play, but the play is poorly worded and I would not allow my student officials ask how to handle the play if one of them asked in the form that play was posted in the thread. The poster wanted to know how to handle the situation, and to give him an answer that would be credible I wanted to know how the play actually went down.


Having said what I said, I went back and re-read the post. It appears the that C/T official had ruled that the free throw had not touched the rim, and the L decided to watch the ball and thought he saw something different. The L does not have this call. If I were the C/T in this play, my ruling would stand. The shooting team's player committed a free throw violation and the shooting team's opponents get the ball for a throw-in nearest the spot of the violation. There is no need to use the AP Arrow in this play. The L has to remember to officiate his primary and to trust his partner.

MTD, Sr.

Yep, I agree. No point in getting it right.

[nine01c]

I agree with Mark. If I were the L who noticed that the ball "barely grazed" the rim,
and my partner had just blown for "missing the rim," I would keep my mouth and whistle shut.

[SamIAm]

I am with you on this one Mark. If the L really was concerned with getting it right, what about the lane violation or foul that L didn't see because he was looking up in the air?

I had a partner make some bad calls (from my vantage point), I quickly blew my whistle and announced that is not what happened and corrected his calls. He tried to do the same to me, I re-corrected him and made sure my ruling was applied. (This would look as stupid as it sounds, even if you tried to do it politely.)

My point is, for game management and to not make a simple call difficult, ignore your difference of opinion.
Same as you would if another official called traveling, don't butt in and say "no he didn't".

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by SamIAm
I am with you on this one Mark. If the L really was concerned with getting it right, what about the lane violation or foul that L didn't see because he was looking up in the air?

I had a partner make some bad calls (from my vantage point), I quickly blew my whistle and announced that is not what happened and corrected his calls. He tried to do the same to me, I re-corrected him and made sure my ruling was applied. (This would look as stupid as it sounds, even if you tried to do it politely.)

My point is, for game management and to not make a simple call difficult, ignore your difference of opinion.
Same as you would if another official called traveling, don't butt in and say "no he didn't".

Okay, first of all, the poster said nothing about where the L was looking. That was another poster making an assumption. Second, the poster said nothing about how the correction was handled. And third, I'm not talking about over-ruling your partner. Just providing him with additional information to help him get it right.

As L we've got to know when the ball hits the rim on a free-throw, otherwise how could we call lane violations? If the L knows it hit the rim, it's almost certain that other people know as well.

So...if I'm the L and I KNOW that the ball hit the rim, I'm going to the T and I'm going to give him the information I have and the opportunity to get it right. If he agrees, then he'll change the call (and we'll go to the arrow in this sit.). What I'm not going to do is announce to the entire gym that my partner was wrong and we're doing it my way.

I had one of these just last week. I'm T and it appeared that the free-throw missed the rim. However, it missed to the far side, thus obscuring my view just a little, and was so close to the rim that I can't be 100% certain. But, I did not see it deflect at all or hear it hit the rim, so I blew it down. My partner either concurred, did not know, or swallowed his whistle (I don't know which, I never asked). But if he KNEW that I was wrong and came to me, I would have welcomed his information and changed my call.

Of course, there are probably times when one should do as nine01c suggests and just swallow the whistle. One good reason would be if you know you're working with a partner who believes that his "rulings" are more important than getting it right. Or one that has forgotten that proper mechanics are merely a tool to give us the best chance of getting it right, and that they have no other point, and that perfectly executed mechanics can never guarantee right calls. Or that deviating from mechanics because of actual knowledge constitutes not trusting your partner. Such a partner would appear to be more interested in his own views and opinions than in getting it right, and probably should not be trusted.

Just one question, if we're not there, working as a team to get it as right as we can, why are we there?

[Edited by Back In The Saddle on Feb 17th, 2004 at 11:09 AM]

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Back In The Saddle:

You are absolutely correct. cc never said where the L was looking in his origianl post, but if the L was not looking up at the ball and the rim, how was he able to decide that the free throw attempt hit the rim? That is why I asked cc to clean up his play in his original post so that we had a better understanding of what happened on the court.

I agree that we want to have all of our calls to be correct. But that still has to be done in the context of officiate your primary and to trust your partner. If and official does not officiating his/her primary and is looking where he/she is not supposed to be looking, then who is officiating his/her primary? He/she is so concerned about watching the ball in his/her partner's area and worrying whether his/her partner is making the correct calll that he/she is missing everything that is going wrong in his/her primary.

This past Friday night I was the U1 in a boys' H.S. varsity game in Michigan. This was the second time I had officiated with these two other officals as a three-man crew. The same official was the R for both games. During the pre-game for the first game, he announced that we would not rotate and the calling official for a foul would become the new C. This official officiated the L position from a spot on the endline between the where the sideline and endline intersect and where the three-point line intersects the endline. He could not have initiated a rotation if his life depended upon it because of his position in the L.

During Friday's game, the R was in the L and I was the T, table side in the first half with Team V in position of the ball in its front court. The ball was table side and six or seven feet into V's front court. In other words I had onball coverage. H1 had a legal guarding position against V1 near my sideling, when V1 attempted to drive between H1 and the sideline. H1 was stationary, and I was preparing to have to either make a charge call against V1 or an out-of-bounds call against V1, when from 35 feet away and way out of his primary the L called a blocking foul on H1. The L had no idea what was going on in his primary and he certainly did not know what was going on in my primary. I said nothing not even at half-time when he berated the entire crew for the lousy job we were doing as officials. I never said a word because I was a visitor on this crew.

With less the one minute to play in the game, the R was in the C opposite the table when V had the ball in its front court. I was L so I was not looking at the ball, but it was table side above the free throw line extended and the T had onball coverage. The C was a good thirty feet away from the ball and had at least four players directly in front of him in his primary area. You guessed it, he called traveling on V1. The T lived with the call.

With less that fifteen seconds to go in the game, H was down by three points and had the ball for a throw-in on the endline, tableside, in its backcourt. I was the T and you know who was L. V was pressing. H inbounded the ball and then V1 knocked a pass between H1 and H2 out-of-bounds on my sideline in front of V's bench. I signaled H ball. From over forty feet away the L game running giving the foul-tip signal (I did not know we were umpiring a baseball game) and signaling that H2 had knocked the ball out-of-bounds. This time I would not let him change the call. I told him that the sideline in this play was my primary, not his and that H was going to get the ball. He protested, stating that he was the R. I told him that he had no business looking where he had been looking because he had too many players in his primary to be looking at the ball.

Needless to say, he did not like what I told him. We finished the game, H lost be three points. He said not a word to me or the other official in the dressing room. All I can say it must have been a long drive home for the two of them because the U2 had driven them to the game.

Remember officiate your primary, trust your partner, and get the plays, such as correctable errors, AP Arrow resets, fights, etc. correct.

MTD, Sr.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Back In The Saddle:

You are absolutely correct. cc never said where the L was looking in his origianl post, but if the L was not looking up at the ball and the rim, how was he able to decide that the free throw attempt hit the rim? That is why I asked cc to clean up his play in his original post so that we had a better understanding of what happened on the court.

Hey Mark, if the L is not able to see when the ball hits the rim how will he know when players (undef NFHS) can enter the lane? You're not suggesting the L should guess, are you?

I agree that we want to have all of our calls to be correct.

That is exactly what we want. No ifs ands or buts - or "who was watching over here while you were watching over there?"'s about it.

Get it right.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
Just one question, if we're not there, working as a team to get it as right as we can, why are we there?

[tomegun]

MTD, in a previous thread we had a difference of opinions that probably got personal. Well, actually we've had a few of these situations. I stated that I could work with you regardless of these situations. Someone told me I couldn't. They were wrong and I knew it. Like my nephew says, your post has me "pumped!" I agree with you 100%! What you said in your post is the art, the zen, the reason we ever do a game with 3 officials. For me, your statements would give me the faith in you to focus on my primary that much more. You hit it on the head, get things right but TCB in your primary. I will continue to do just what you said in your post and not take other things so seriously. Since I used the word zen you can probably tell I'm a Lakers fan. Boy do we need some zen!