We had this discussion at a summer camp last week and we had a number of different answers to the scenario what do you think you be the best call to make or not make.

The ball is inbounded on the end line after a made basket. You have a fresh 30 second shot clock.
As the team brings the ball up in the backcourt you have a seven second count on the dribbler. The defense is pressing the dribbler in the backcourt.You take a quick glance at the shot clock and see that it has not started what is the best call for an official to make or not make at this moment. I look forward to you replies

You let play continue, until it gets to a pause or a settling place, and you keep counting. (1) At a stop (or at the 10-second violation), you whistle the ball dead, deal with the clock problem, and give the ball to whoever gets it. (B) If the progress of the ball continues to a made basket, you let Team B inbound and see if the shot clock starts then. If not, stop play immediately and deal with the problem. (C) If the progress continues quickly to a shot and a missed basket, you let play continue until either team has control, and then stop play, and deal with the shot clock.

Item 1 is most likely, since there will almost certainly be a pause or settle once the ball crosses the division line. You should take the first opportunity. Or there will be a 10-second violation and the ball will turn over.

When you deal with the table, be sure you do two things: a) set the shot clock to the time you counted to b) figure out why it didn't start, and see to it that it won't happen again.

IMO at this point it doesn't make sense to stop play. Give the defense a shot at getting the 10 second violation, once the ball is over the mid court line blow it dead & adjust the shot clock. And keep a better eye on the table. ;)

Beatcha!! Ha, ha!!

MTBABO, did that happen to be one of the camps at York U??

Because I was there for MDP #1 and the majority of the table crews I worked with were the players from the Juvenile Provincial Team, and they did an absolutely horrible job.

[Edited by ref18 on Jul 7th, 2004 at 05:45 PM]

Ah, yes, I see nothing has changed with those camps.

Tables crews that have the attention span of a rock. "Co-Head Coaches" becuase they want twe coaches to be able to walk the sideline because getting that extra 6 feet closer to a player sure helps the message sink in. (Discipline is lost in many of these players.) Did the microphones not work again this year? Were the video tape angles horrible as usual, with walls in the way, overhanging basketball nets or trying to videotape through the backs of the crowd's heads?

Don't get me wrong, I learned alot from those camps. Have been to OFSAAs/Nike Camps/etc becuase of those camps. I also learned that year after year the video-taping and voice overs were sub-par. (I have video-tape where I can't hear a damn thing that is being said. Funny thing is after we told them about the crappy equipment they used it year after year.) However, my view may be skewed because I work for a video company.

As for the original post, yes, let the 10s violatio nahppen and as soon as the ball crosses half, blow it dead and reset the shot clock to the proper value.


[QUOTE]Originally posted by ref18
[B]MTBABO, did that happen to be one of the camps at York U??

Because I was there for MDP #1 and the majority of the table crews I worked with were the players from the Juvenile Provincial Team, and they did an absolutely horrible job.

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Jul 7th, 2004 at 11:05 PM]

they still had problems with the microphones, but this year they tried something new. Walkie-talkies. It is extremely wierd to have an evaluators voice in your head as you're reffing. There were some pretty good evaluators. After last years 6 month wait for my evaluation, they had each evaluator give us a copy of a written evaluation after each game, although I wasn't entirely pleased with my performance I will be back next year. The social had to be one of the best parts of the camp, I had fun.

I think they should've had the officials that were not working at the tables doing the shot clock or working the scoreboard, but that is just my opinion.

SHOT CLOCK ANSWER
 

The following response is provided by Peter Webb, Coordinator of Interpreters, IAABO, Inc.



First, the issue is not what you, I or someone else would call in this or any other situation. The issue is, the situation exists and the official must make a ruling that can be supported by the rulesbook. A simple call/judgement is not an alternative in this or any situation.



The appropriate application of rules in the described situation is to:



1. continue the count

2. apply the violation (10 - seconds), should it reach that point ; the shot clock then would

be a non-issue. Award the ball, to the opponent, for a throw-in at the spot nearest to where the violation occured.

OR

3.upon the team successfully obtaining frontcourt status, signal time out/stop the clock

and based on definite information (the official's count) correct the shot clock (remove



the number of seconds counted plus one second lag time if there is not a "magic whistle" in use) then award the ball out-of-bounds,at a throw-in spot nearest to where the ball was located at the time the official signaled timeout/stop the clock to the team that was in control. The team would then have the remaining shot clock time.



Rationale:



To stop the clock at the 7 second count mark would cause the defense to be placed at a potential disadvantage not intended by rule (a new 10 second allowance in the backcourt) and, in the interval of time, a rule is being applied (10 second time limit) that can provide an accurate ruling for the situation.



References:



NCAA Rulesbook 2.3; 9.9; 2.12.14; 2.13.12



Ed Bilik, NCAA Rules Editor (interpretation)

mtbabo, just out of curiosity, what camp were you at??

Re: SHOT CLOCK ANSWER
 

Where does this extra second come from? Rules reference?

I don't have a reference in front of me, but the lag time principle is in the book. I'm sure if you search this site for "timing errors" you'll find a long thread with many references to that rule.

Not in the ncaa book which he referenced.

sorry, i missed that part

:)

Did Ed Bilik or Peter Webb supply the interpretation? Just want to point out that IABBO interpretations are not valid for either NCAA or NFHS rulesets.