Unsportsmanlike? - Page 3

blindzebra · #31 (**permalink**) Thu Nov 18, 2004, 04:56pm

Quote:

Originally posted by BushRef

Quote:

Originally posted by blindzebra

What based on B's stalling did A truely gain in this situation? A is down 5 with 7 seconds left, we have 3 possible outcomes:

1) B stalls down to 1 or 2 seconds and whistle violation, A's ball, still down 5. 1a) You ignore A's touch and keep counting to the violation and you have to whack B's coach.

2) You call the T on A for an unwarned delay, B shoots 2 gets ball at division line up 5,6, or 7 with 3 or 4 seconds left.

3) You start your count on B, blow your whistle on the touch by A and warn, B's ball up 5 with 3 or 4 seconds left with the end line to run.

1 and 1a benefit A.

2 benefits B and the penalty based on the intent, as discribed, seems harsh.

3 does not hurt either team, the only difference is B can't take the running clock down to 1 or 2 seconds. A gained a couple of seconds life, and B keeps the ball and the end line run. Seems very fair based on this situation.

I guess the first part of your name is the most fitting. Looks like you misread the original sitch. Team A was down 5, then scored, so now they're down 3. If you stop the clock for a warning, and A manages to steal the inbounds or get a 5 second call, all they need is a 3 to tie. By calling the warning, you have saved them some of the time they may need to get their shot off.

Let's get personal, the score does not change a thing.

It still comes down to an unusual situation and using common sense. Also 9.2.11 says 5 seconds or less on that throw in, this situation was at 7 seconds. I'm not so blind afterall.

IAABO_Ref · #32 (**permalink**) Fri Nov 19, 2004, 09:01am

Quote:

Originally posted by Grail
I did have a few words for my partner after the game. I phrased them with, "lets break the play down" and then we discussed.

I agree whole heartedly that a T was not warranted.

Now lets add a wrinkle (actually happened). When white batted the ball towards blue, the ball rolled 12 feet back to the wall because blue wouldn't take the ball. I believe that White would have left the ball alone had my partner been counting, but after they caused it to roll to the wall, could he have given a delay warning? If he does, the clock stops and Blue has to inbound giving White an unmerited advantage. Could he have T'd white for delay, thus negating the benefit caused by just giving a warning?

Case Book 9-2-11 Comment:

In situations with the clock running and FIVE or LESS seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be IGNORED if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the throwers efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic.

There was seven seconds to go in the game so this doesnt apply at all. This comment is when blue wouldnt have to inbound the ball prior to time expiring, not the case here. Next white didnt do it to try to stop the clock, but they were trying to get blue to inbound the ball. Next blue was making no attempt to inbound the ball so they couldnt interfere with a throwers effort. By the same comment you quoted you would only ignore the delay even if there was five seconds or less to go.

So you couldnt issue a T to white unless it was there second such delay.