The Official Forum - Count it or not ?

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - Count it or not ? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/12436-count-not.html)

Quote:

Originally posted by BoomerSooner
I would tend to ere on the side of any pass close to the basket as having a possiblity of going in, but from the top of the arc a lob pass to a player trying to dunk that wouldn't even hit the backboard w/o outside influence shouldn't be awarded 3pts if deflected by the defense. I don't have my current Fed book with me, but I believe the spirit of the rule is the same (and hopefully a proper interp to go with it).

When you find your FED rulebook, you'll also find that you are wrong. Just read the FED rules and the case book play cited above. Those <b>are</b> the proper interps for high school. That's why I posted them.

I just want to be clear on the concensus, if there is one:

If A1 makes a lob pass from outside the 3-pt arc, intended as an oop for A2, but B2 jumps with A2 and inadvertently deflects the ball into the goal, is that a 2 or a 3?

Quote:

Originally posted by theboys
I just want to be clear on the concensus, if there is one:

If A1 makes a lob pass from outside the 3-pt arc, intended as an oop for A2, but B2 jumps with A2 and inadvertently deflects the ball into the goal, is that a 2 or a 3?

It's a 3 in high school rules. No judgement involved, because of the explicitly written rule. It's only a 3 in NCAA rules if the official thought the ball still had a chance to go in if the defense hadn't touched it.

Yikes. It will be at least a 3. Might be a 7 or 8 after the FTs for the T to B's coach, and the ensuing possession by A.

We have to be careful about applying the spirit and intent of this rule.

This rule change was specifically for the purpose of not having to judege whether a thrown ball that went in was a shot or a pass. It was not meant to apply to a ball clearly NOT thrown in the vicinity of the basket. A deflection is just a tiny wrinkle in the rule where judgement will again be needed.

For example...A1 at the top of the key makes a very hard pass to A2 in the corner. B3, somehow, gets into the passing lane and bats the ball upwards such that it goes into the basket. No way this is intended to be a 3 and should be ruled a two.

If that thrown ball falls below the rim, the same thing applies. If it was possibly a 3 point shot but falls below the rim, it is now just a loose ball that fall through the bucket.

The rule, by any logicial common sense reasoning, is meant to apply to thrown balls that could possibly be a try.

Quote:

Originally posted by Camron Rust
We have to be careful about applying the spirit and intent of this rule.

This rule change was specifically for the purpose of not having to judege whether a thrown ball that went in was a shot or a pass. It was not meant to apply to a ball clearly NOT thrown in the vicinity of the basket. A deflection is just a tiny wrinkle in the rule where judgement will again be needed.

For example...A1 at the top of the key makes a very hard pass to A2 in the corner. B3, somehow, gets into the passing lane and bats the ball upwards such that it goes into the basket. No way this is intended to be a 3 and should be ruled a two.

If that thrown ball falls below the rim, the same thing applies. If it was possibly a 3 point shot but falls below the rim, it is now just a loose ball that fall through the bucket.

The rule, by any logicial common sense reasoning, is meant to apply to thrown balls that could possibly be a try.

I agree 100% with this and that is why we still have casebook play 4.40.4 Sit B, which tells us that a 3pt try which is short and below the level of the ring when it hits the shoulder of another player (either team) and enters the basket only counts for TWO points.

We need to have the understanding that Camron puts forward in order to make these two rules mesh.