The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 12:42pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Question

In another thread, Camron posted: "Only when the ball is live are there restrictions on who can call timeout....only the team that has a player control (not team control)."

This got me to thinking (which, my wife tells me, can be very dangerous). On an inbound play, the ball becomes live when at the disposal of the inbounder. However, there is no team or player control at that point, since player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds. Also however, the defending team may not legally be granted a TO during this time.

Is this consistent with the theory that, during a live ball, only the team in player control may legally be granted a TO?

Is there a written exception to this in NF rules?
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 01:06pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
In another thread, Camron posted: "Only when the ball is live are there restrictions on who can call timeout....only the team that has a player control (not team control)."

This got me to thinking (which, my wife tells me, can be very dangerous). On an inbound play, the ball becomes live when at the disposal of the inbounder. However, there is no team or player control at that point, since player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds. Also however, the defending team may not legally be granted a TO during this time.

Is this consistent with the theory that, during a live ball, only the team in player control may legally be granted a TO?

Is there a written exception to this in NF rules?
5-8 ART.3 a. The ball is in control or at the DISPOSAL of a player of his/her team.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 01:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 377
Don't you love it when they're this easy?

But let me ask this about the college inbound rules. First let me state some rules (please correct me if I am wrong on any of these).

1. An NCAA inbound ends when a player controls the ball.
2. A NFHS inbound ends when a player touches the ball.
3. NCAA and NFHS possession arrows are switched after the inbounds ends.

Can someone describe a play in which this makes a difference?

[Edited by lrpalmer3 on May 27th, 2004 at 02:33 PM]
__________________
Luther
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 01:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by lrpalmer3
Don't you love it when they're this easy?
It won't be, MTD will have a cone of disposability around the thrower that does not permit a time out.

[Edited by blindzebra on May 27th, 2004 at 02:36 PM]
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 01:35pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,674
Quote:
Originally posted by lrpalmer3
Don't you love it when they're this easy?

But let me ask this about the college inbound rules. First let me state some rules (please correct me if I am wrong on any of these).

1. An NCAA inbound ends when a player controls the ball.
2. A NFHS inbound ends when a player touches the ball.
3. NCAA and NFHS possession arrows are switched after the inbounds ends.

Can someone describe a play in which this makes a difference?

[Edited by lrpalmer3 on May 27th, 2004 at 02:33 PM]
You'd be talking about the team control foul in NCAA.
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 01:51pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by blindzebra
Quote:
Originally posted by lrpalmer3
Don't you love it when they're this easy?
It won't be, MTD will have a cone of disposability around the thrower that does not permit a time out.

Actually, there's also a "cone of verticality" directly over top of the OOB line on a throw-in. This is a special "cone of verticality" though, because it's a "one-way cone of verticality". The thrower can reach through this "one-way cone of verticality", but a defensive player CANNOT reach through the exact same "one-way cone of verticality".

And so endeth today's lesson!



"There are 2 things that I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people and the French"
- Mark Padgett
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 02:12pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by lrpalmer3
Don't you love it when they're this easy?

But let me ask this about the college inbound rules. First let me state some rules (please correct me if I am wrong on any of these).

1. An NCAA inbound ends when a player controls the ball.
2. A NFHS inbound ends when a player touches the ball.
3. NCAA and NFHS possession arrows are switched after the inbounds ends.

Can someone describe a play in which this makes a difference?

[Edited by lrpalmer3 on May 27th, 2004 at 02:33 PM]
Yep.

Under ncaa we do not shot bonus ft's when the foul is by the team in control. Team control begins on the throw-in when the ball's at the disposal- can't shoot bonus ft's. If the throw-in ended on the tip, you could have a period of time where there is NO team control (and could shoot bonus ft's) after the ball is released on the throw-in and before the ball is controlled on the court (once again could not shoot bonus ft's). That is how the rule was read when this change was made 2 yrs ago. Last year the rule was re-worded and eliminated this case by saying the throw-in ends on a player controlling the inbounds pass. Meaning there's team control even on the tip and you don't shoot ft's on the throw-in until there's player control.

Kinda confusng...get it?

(BTW, when I say shooting ft's I mean shooting ft's on what amounts to "offensive fouls" in the above example.)
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 02:14pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

"There are 2 things that I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people and the French"
- Mark Padgett
Intolerance is something I will not put up with!
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 04:18pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 9,466
Send a message via AIM to rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

"There are 2 things that I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people and the French"
- Mark Padgett
Intolerance is something I will not put up with!

Dan -- There's that non-U grammar again! Never end a sentence with a preposition.

Try, "Intolerance is something up with which I will not put." See?
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 04:58pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

"There are 2 things that I hate in this world. People who are intolerant of other people and the French"
- Mark Padgett
Intolerance is something I will not put up with!

Dan -- There's that non-U grammar again! Never end a sentence with a preposition.

Try, "Intolerance is something up with which I will not put." See?
Or alternatively....

Intolerance is something that I will not put up with, moron."

Is that better, Juulie?
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 05:08pm
Ref Ump Welsch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Talking

So Mark, I guess my wife isn't the only one who thinks her husband actually thinking is dangerous!
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 05:31pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Cool

Quote:
Originally posted by Ref Ump Welsch
So Mark, I guess my wife isn't the only one who thinks her husband actually thinking is dangerous!
As I've mentioned before, my wife has a key chain that states "Men are like dogs - dumb but trainable"

BTW - I didn't say that stuff about the French as posted above, although it is clever. My statements about them are usually more in the vein that they're a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys.

I heard that when EuroDisney opened and they set off fireworks, the entire French army surrendered.

My bumper sticker states: "Cut domestic cheese".
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 06:16pm
Ref Ump Welsch
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Mark,

I heard the newspaper in Paris had the headline that said "Americans go Home" and next thing you know, all the American men had been eliminated from the French Open. How ironic is that????
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 08:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
In another thread, Camron posted: "Only when the ball is live are there restrictions on who can call timeout....only the team that has a player control (not team control)."

This got me to thinking (which, my wife tells me, can be very dangerous). On an inbound play, the ball becomes live when at the disposal of the inbounder. However, there is no team or player control at that point, since player control is defined as holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds. Also however, the defending team may not legally be granted a TO during this time.

Is this consistent with the theory that, during a live ball, only the team in player control may legally be granted a TO?

Is there a written exception to this in NF rules?
OK. I was a litte incomplete (or maybe inaccurate depending on how you look at it).

Perhaps better a better statement:

Only when the ball is live are there restrictions on who can call timeout....only the team that has a player control (not just team control) or has the ball at their disposal for a throw-in or free throw.

__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu May 27, 2004, 09:08pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,988
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett
Quote:
Originally posted by Ref Ump Welsch
So Mark, I guess my wife isn't the only one who thinks her husband actually thinking is dangerous!
As I've mentioned before, my wife has a key chain that states "Men are like dogs - dumb but trainable"

BTW - I didn't say that stuff about the French as posted above, although it is clever. My statements about them are usually more in the vein that they're a bunch of cheese eating surrender monkeys.

I heard that when EuroDisney opened and they set off fireworks, the entire French army surrendered.

My bumper sticker states: "Cut domestic cheese".
lmfao
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:15pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1