Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by johnnyrao
Quote:
Originally posted by bob jenkins
This falls under the "correctable error" provisions -- erroneously counting or cancelling a score. It must be corrected before the second live ball.
|
I'm certainly no expert but I have to ask. If you correct this than, in my opinion, you are admiting a mistake by not calling the origianl violation which, I think, is a judgment call. Can the referees go back and review a judgment call and then decide that they bew it and correct the score? What if it wasn't a backboard violation? What if it was a missed traveling call? If U1 does not call an obvious travel and the player scores a basket does the coach have the right to question it at the next dead ball? If so, can the R overrule U1 if he knows for a fact his partner blew it and then use the correctable error rule as justification? I'm not picking on you Bob, but youre explanation above has me confused. My original thought was that there is nothing you can do in this case since you can't go back and call a violation after you missed it. Seems to me you did not erroneously cancel the score because you didn't call a violation. Perhaps the best you can do is admit you blew it and drive on, but can you really use correctable error?
|
I think we've caught bob in one of his rare mistakes. I can't remember a time when he was wrong, so this is a day to take note of. This is a no-call, and can't be corrected. The ref just has to live with "the ignominy and disgrace" of making the mistake.
|
Philososophically, I agree that you should have to live and die with missing the call if that much time expired. And, certainly, if you change the play to a different violation--such as travelling, shooter stepping OOB, etc., would you correct all of those too? For that matter, R2-10-1 says "a
rule is inadvertantly set aside", so you could theoretically include a PC foul in that "correction after the fact" category too. Sure opens up a can of worms.
But.......
In a strict reading of rule 2-10:
1) There
is a rule that states that a ball shot over the backboard is OOB, and thus dead.
2) A rule
was therefore inadvertantly set aside, and such fact was admitted to by the official.
3) The rule that was inadvertantly set aside
did result in a score being erroneously counted.
4) The "error" of counting the score
was recognized in a timely fashion.
Conclusion? Bwaaaaaaaaaaaa!!
I don't have a clue on how to really argue this one with Bob.
Sun Dec 19, 2004, 07:52am
Threaded Mode
