Bench player intereferes

[Jay R]

Found this question on a website, but no answer. So I am curious.

Team A is down by 2 points as the game clock is running down. A1 attempts a 3pt shot. Bench player B6 runs onto the court and blocks A1's attempt as the buzzer sounds. What is the ruling?

This was an NCAA rules question.

[Edited by Jay R on Aug 23rd, 2004 at 11:42 AM]

[bob jenkins]

There is no (consensus) ruling on this play.

A T only provides two throws, and that doesn't seem to be "fair".

Come up with some creative method to give A a chance to win the game.

[PS2Man]

I think this would be one of those "the referee can rule on anything not specifically covered in the rulebook."

I think Bob is right. I would call enough Ts to make to give the offended team a change to win the game.

One T for coming off the bench. Another for stopping the play. Now they have 4 FTs and the ball at the POI if they cannot score two points.

Sounds fair to me.

[ChuckElias]

Jay, take a look at http://www.officialforum.com/thread/5533

[Adam]

Three shots for the foul on B6 against the shooter.
Two shots for the technical foul for an illegal substitution. If you really want to get mean, you can give A two more shots for B playing with 6 on the court (7 shots total).

Of course, if you give the last T, you'll likely have a direct T (total of 9 shots now) on the head coach for mentioning your mother.

Adam (I'm giving 5 shots and the ball here, working with FED rules.)

[Jay R]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
Jay, take a look at http://www.officialforum.com/thread/5533

Thanks Chuck,

I was not a regular when it was originally debated.

[Camron Rust]

I'm not sure what I said that last time this came up.

My current solution...

Using 2-3, consider it an unwritten form of goattending (a shot was blocked illegally)...count the bucket.

Then, call a flagrant T on the player.

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
I'm not sure what I said that last time this came up.

My current solution...

Using 2-3, consider it an unwritten form of goattending (a shot was blocked illegally)...count the bucket.

Then, call a flagrant T on the player.

Camron, I went back and read the thread... that wasn't your answer then. (Although Juulie agreed with you, then.) You were in the travesty and forfeit camp.

One thing I found interesting about the old thread (2 year ago) is that all of the discussion considered that the shooter had been fouled and many of the commentor's penalties for equalizing this illegal act, were based upon the shooter being fouled ... what if he wasn't? The situation still calls for an equitable solution.

[ChrisSportsFan]

great thread. if this ever did happen, the penalty has to hurt bad enough so that nobody elso wants to give it a try again. Doesn't seem like you'd have alot of selling to do to D coach as he'd should be busy beatin the snot out of his player. (unless, this is a "dirty" coach who told his player to do it) If that could be proven, I think this coach goes before the state board for punishment.

[WeekendRef]

because the bench player took this opportunity of a 3 pointer away from the shooter illegally.... although I can't cite a rule. I would give three shots (or two if he was inside the arc)regardless if he was fouled or not . Plus all the penalties Snaqwells mentioned plus I would probably assess a tech to the bench for good measure . That is nine shots and I don't think I would get an arguement from anyone in the gym .

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChrisSportsFan
great thread. if this ever did happen, the penalty has to hurt bad enough so that nobody elso wants to give it a try again. Doesn't seem like you'd have alot of selling to do to D coach as he'd should be busy beatin the snot out of his player. (unless, this is a "dirty" coach who told his player to do it) If that could be proven, I think this coach goes before the state board for punishment.

Did you notice that this was an end-of-the game situation? That means that the defensive player had to come from the OTHER end of the court and into his opponent's bench area to interfere in the play.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown
[/B]

One thing I found interesting about the old thread (2 year ago) is that all of the discussion considered that the shooter had been fouled and many of the commentor's penalties for equalizing this illegal act, were based upon the shooter being fouled ... what if he wasn't? The situation still calls for an equitable solution. [/B][/QUOTE]How about one T for a bench player being on his feet while play was going on, then another T for that player coming onto the court, and then follow that with a 3rd T for the player subsequently committing an unsporting act by interfering with play? You have three separate acts committed by the same goober, and three separate penalties are then applied for each act. Total of 6 FT's and the ball then goes OOB to the shooting team. And if it happened in high school, you'd also lay an indirect T on the head coach for EACH T charged to the bench player. Iow, the head coach is now also gone for the 3 indirect T's. Write everything up. That should take care of everything.

[Lotto]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
That should take care of everything.

Oh, c'mon. You could easily throw in another T there for 6 players on the court.

[ChuckElias]

After making fun of me in the thread about the dreams, I can't believe MTD, Sr hasn't made snide comments here after I posted another link from long ago. Especially since that thread is the origination of the DeNucci Doctrine!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally posted by Jay R
Found this question on a website, but no answer. So I am curious.

Team A is down by 2 points as the game clock is running down. A1 attempts a 3pt shot. Bench player B6 runs onto the court and blocks A1's attempt as the buzzer sounds. What is the ruling?

This was an NCAA rules question.

[Edited by Jay R on Aug 23rd, 2004 at 11:42 AM]

I don't have my rules books in front of me because my basketball briefcases are in the attic right now and I do not feel like climbing up there to get them. That said lets break-down this play.


1) A1 is dribbling the ball toward his basket while there are only five players from Team A on the court and five players from Team B on the court.

2) A1 releases a three-point field goal attempt before time expires to end playing time in the fourth quarter (NFHS), second half (NFHS/NCAA), or overtime period (NFHS/NCAA).

3) Before time expires and after A1 releases the ball for his field goal B6 leaves the Team B bench and enters the playing court.

4) As playing time expires, B6 makes contact A1's three-point field goal attempt while the ball was still on its upward trajectory. The B6's contact with the ball occurs as the Timer's horn sounds to signal end of playing time. B6's contact with the ball causes the A1's field goal attempt to be unsuccessful.


What do the officials have beside what a US Marine would call a "cluster f***?"


RULING:

1) When B6 enters the playing court, B6 has committed a technical foul for illegally entering the court. I am going to make Assumption #1: The covering official saw B6 illegally enter the court and correctly sounds his whistle when B6 illegally enters the court. B6 will be charged with a technical foul for an illegally entering the court.

2) The official's whistle does not cause the ball to become dead. The Timer should stop the game clock when the game official sounds his whistle. Remember that NFHS and NCAA rules differ with the regard to lag time. Since we do not know if lag time was a factor in this play. I am going make Assumption #2: That the Timer did not stop the clock when the game official sounded his whistle and that had the Timer reacted correctly to the game official's whistle, the game clock whould have been stopped by the time B6 made contact with A1's field goal attempt.

3) Remember, that even if the Timer had stopped the game clock correctly, it is legal for a player from Team B to block A1's field goal attempt.

4) Applying Assumption #2, the game clock has to be reset to the time on the game clock at the time of B6's illegal entry onto the playing court.

5) Applying my Assumption #2 once again, the following two questions need to be answered: Does B6 become a legal player when he illegally enters the playing court? Can Team B be charged with a technical foul for having six players on the court?

The answer to the first question is no. B6 has not become a legal player. The game official sounded his whistle when B6 illegally entered the court. B6's technical foul was recognized by the game official when the infraction of the rules occured. The answer to the second question is no. Since B6's illegal entry onto the playing court was recognized by the game official when the infraction occured, Team B cannot be guilty of having six players on the court.

6) Even though any of the five legal Team B players could have blocked A1's field goal attempt after the official sounded his whistle and the game clock was stopped. B6 cannot. B6's contact with A1' field goal attempt should be considered unsportsmanlike conduct and should be charged with a technical foul for unsportsmanlike conduct. I am not going to get into how many team fouls are counted toward Team B's team foul count, B6 is disqualified for receiving two technical fouls. And Team A is awarded four free throws for B6's two technical fouls and will then receive the ball for a throw-in at the division line.

MTD, Sr.