erroneously counting a score

[mthomas]

I was watching a boys varsity game (after I had officiated the jv game) and saw the following:

A-1 shoots the ball, B-1 blocks the ball (near the rim), the LEAD official call Goal Tending. The TRAIL
official then comes in (whose call it would have been--not the LEAD) and has a 1 minute meeting with the LEAD official and informs him that the ball had "no chance of going in", therefore it can't be goal tending. They then decide to give the ball back to Team A. ("as this is the fairest thing to do").

At half-time while discussing this play, I told that yes it was a "correctable error" as in (2-10, Art.1E and Art.6), but that they should have gone to the alternating possession arrow to decide who gets the ball. Since there was no team control when the whistle blew.

There is no case book play on this play. Would like to hear some feeback on this interesting play.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by mthomas
I was watching a boys varsity game (after I had officiated the jv game) and saw the following:

A-1 shoots the ball, B-1 blocks the ball (near the rim), the LEAD official call Goal Tending. The TRAIL
official then comes in (whose call it would have been--not the LEAD) and has a 1 minute meeting with the LEAD official and informs him that the ball had "no chance of going in", therefore it can't be goal tending. They then decide to give the ball back to Team A. ("as this is the fairest thing to do").

At half-time while discussing this play, I told that yes it was a "correctable error" as in (2-10, Art.1E and Art.6), but that they should have gone to the alternating possession arrow to decide who gets the ball. Since there was no team control when the whistle blew.

There is no case book play on this play. Would like to hear some feeback on this interesting play.

I think there were quite a few mistakes here, but none of them was correctable. The first mistake was in thinking that a call could be reversed as a 2-10 correctable error. Calling goaltending is not "counting a score" so the call can't be changed as a correctable error even if it was totally the wrong call. Secondly, even if the ball had "no chance of going in" if the defender touched the ball above the level of the rim on it's downward flight in the general direction of the basket, it's goaltending. Third, perhaps the lead should not have called that according to the book, but once it's called the partner should definitely not sail in and overrule. No matter how bad the call, overruling is never okay.

Still, I'm not the authority on goaltending, so don't take this as final.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by rainmaker

I think there were quite a few mistakes here, but none of them was correctable. The first mistake was in thinking that a call could be reversed as a 2-10 correctable error. Calling goaltending is not "counting a score" so the call can't be changed as a correctable error even if it was totally the wrong call. Secondly, even if the ball had "no chance of going in" if the defender touched the ball above the level of the rim on it's downward flight in the general direction of the basket, it's goaltending. Third, perhaps the lead should not have called that according to the book, but once it's called the partner should definitely not sail in and overrule. No matter how bad the call, overruling is never okay.

Still, I'm not the authority on goaltending, so don't take this as final.

rainmaker, I agree with you that this is not a 2-10 correctable error. If goaltending by the defense is called, even if it is called incorrectly, part of the penalty is awarding of points. Therefore, these points have NOT been erroneously counted. They have been counted according to the rules based upon the call the official made.
However, your second point is not correct. 4-22 states, "and has the possibility of entering the basket in flight," so that is one of the requirements that has to be met for a goaltending call to be properly made.
I also happen to believe that the Trail should come in and convince his partner to change an incorrect call that was afterall his primary responsibility. In this case he had definite knowledge that goaltending was not the correct call. Good job by that official to get the play right, good job by the partner for changing the original call.

mthomas,
Also this should be treated as an accidental whistle under 7.5.4 and if neither team had control when the whistle blew to make the ball dead, then going to the AP is correct. Forget about "the fair thing to do." Do it according to the rules.

[BktBallRef]

I agree with NV.

If the ball has no chance of going in, it's not GT.

Also, it's the T's call. Nothing wrong with coming in and discussing it, especially when an official makes a call that isn't his. It would be similiar to the L calling an OOB play on the T's sideline.

No team control, go to the AP.

[rainmaker]

Okay, you guys have more experience than me, I defer. I suppose it's possible I'm mis-interpreting the part about "having no chance of going in". It sounded to me as though the T was being officious.

So, now I've got a question. When is it okay for the one ref to "step in" and give the partner a "chance to change their call"? I've gotten the feeling this was never okay on a foul, virtually never on a violation, and once a game total would be about the maximum. Is that a fair reading?

[Adam]

Originally posted by rainmaker
Okay, you guys have more experience than me, I defer. I suppose it's possible I'm mis-interpreting the part about "having no chance of going in". It sounded to me as though the T was being officious.

So, now I've got a question. When is it okay for the one ref to "step in" and give the partner a "chance to change their call"? I've gotten the feeling this was never okay on a foul, virtually never on a violation, and once a game total would be about the maximum. Is that a fair reading?

I'd say in general you're right, but only because this should only be needed that often. This play, in which the L made a call he shouldn't have even seen, is one that should be changed. A correlation would be that if I'm calling my partners line regularly, I should expect to get regular counsel from her.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by rainmaker
So, now I've got a question. When is it okay for the one ref to "step in" and give the partner a "chance to change their call"? I've gotten the feeling this was never okay on a foul, virtually never on a violation, and once a game total would be about the maximum. Is that a fair reading?

I'd have to say that is about right.
I'm more likely to have a chat with my partner if he calls a violation, such as a travel or DD, in my primary area and is wrong. We are also going to have a not so nice conversation in the lockerroom either at halftime or after the game about why he feels the need to watch my area and who is watching his.

For fouls out his primary which are wrong, he is going to have to deal with the coach on the floor and me in the lockerroom. I don't care at all what he calls in his primary, unless he asks me for help.

On OOB I pregame that I don't want help unless I ask for it as I may be passing on a foul, and I do ask if the crowd is booing terribly or the coach is really upset. I also won't go to a partner until he asks and that is stated in the pregame as well.

If this happens more than once in the game, we are having a bad night.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Nevadaref

I'd have to say that is about right.
I'm more likely to have a chat with my partner if he calls a violation, such as a travel or DD, in my primary area and is wrong. We are also going to have a not so nice conversation in the lockerroom either at halftime or after the game about why he feels the need to watch my area and who is watching his.

For fouls out his primary which are wrong, he is going to have to deal with the coach on the floor and me in the lockerroom. I don't care at all what he calls in his primary, unless he asks me for help.

On OOB I pregame that I don't want help unless I ask for it as I may be passing on a foul, and I do ask if the crowd is booing terribly or the coach is really upset. I also won't go to a partner until he asks and that is stated in the pregame as well.

If this happens more than once in the game, we are having a bad night.

Okay. So, what you're saying is you think it was okay for the T to step in in this case and "give information" to the L because it wasn't the L's call at all, and it was very wrong. Now, would it take you a full minute to handle it? I mean that mthomas said that they had a one minute meeting. Does that seem to you too long?

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by rainmaker
Okay. So, what you're saying is you think it was okay for the T to step in in this case and "give information" to the L because it wasn't the L's call at all, and it was very wrong.

Absolutely.

Originally posted by rainmaker

Now, would it take you a full minute to handle it? I mean that mthomas said that they had a one minute meeting. Does that seem to you too long?

Not with the guys that I work with. It would go something like this:
Me: [comes in to discuss] "Hey, you know that you just called GT/BI as Lead? And you booted it because it didn't have a chance to go in. How about we go with the arrow?"
Partner: Likely response "Oh, (^#!& what am I doing? Sorry. Yeah, ok, who has the arrow?"

Partner would then toot the whistle and give the held ball signal. It is still his call to change, but I would insist on this type of play.

Total elapsed time: 14.2 seconds

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Total elapsed time: 14.2 seconds

Does that include lag time for the clock operator?

[mthomas]

Nevadaref--

mthomas,
Also this should be treated as an accidental whistle under 7.5.4 and if neither team had control when the whistle blew to make the ball dead, then going to the AP is correct. Forget about "the fair thing to do." Do it according to the rules. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree with most of what you said and I was also going to cite this rule as I did in the lockerroom at half-time. Between the 2 rules "correctable error" and "accidental whistle", this should cover it. I still think that either rule can cover this situation.

The "fair thing to do" quote was said by the varsity officials NOT me. I said, in the locker room "that it doesn't matter what the fair thing to do, the rules state that you go to the alternating possession arrow."

I received an e-mail from one of the "varsity Officials" in this contest today and he agrees with me after the fact...."that they should have gone to the arrow."

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by mthomas
I received an e-mail from one of the "varsity Officials" in this contest today and he agrees with me after the fact...."that they should have gone to the arrow."

Doncha love that feeling?!

[Adam]

Originally posted by mthomas
Nevadaref--

mthomas,
Also this should be treated as an accidental whistle under 7.5.4 and if neither team had control when the whistle blew to make the ball dead, then going to the AP is correct. Forget about "the fair thing to do." Do it according to the rules.

I agree with most of what you said and I was also going to cite this rule as I did in the lockerroom at half-time. Between the 2 rules "correctable error" and "accidental whistle", this should cover it. I still think that either rule can cover this situation.

The "fair thing to do" quote was said by the varsity officials NOT me. I said, in the locker room "that it doesn't matter what the fair thing to do, the rules state that you go to the alternating possession arrow."

I received an e-mail from one of the "varsity Officials" in this contest today and he agrees with me after the fact...."that they should have gone to the arrow." [/B][/QUOTE]

This is a case where the fair thing to do is what the book says. How is it fair to award the ball to A when the whistle occurred in the middle of a shot?
did A get the rebound before the whistle? If so, then I would think the book would say to give the ball to A.

[ChrisSportsFan]

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Absolutely.

Not with the guys that I work with. It would go something like this:
Me: [comes in to discuss] "Hey, you know that you just called GT/BI as Lead? And you booted it because it didn't have a chance to go in. How about we go with the arrow?"
Partner: Likely response "Oh, (^#!& what am I doing? Sorry. Yeah, ok, who has the arrow?"

Partner would then toot the whistle and give the held ball signal. It is still his call to change, but I would insist on this type of play.

Total elapsed time: 14.2 seconds

Just to clarify, you're saying that you're not counting the points here and going to the arrow.?

You're not saying that the points are going to count because that can't be corrected and still go to the arrow. Right?

No sarcasim intended, just want to see if I'm on the same page. Heck, sometimes I just want to know if I'm in the same library.