Airborn Shooter

[Jurassic Referee]

Lah me, simple play.

Rule 6-7Exception3-- foul during a try-- "The trying motion must be continuous and begins after the ball comes to rest in the player's hand(s) on a try or touches the hand(s) on a tap, and is completed when the ball is clearly in flight". Iow, in this case the initial trying motion in this sitch ENDED by rule as soon as the ball left the shooter's hand(s).

Rule- 4-40-4--"The try ends when....it is certain that the throw is unsuccessful...." In this case, the try ends as soon as the shooter touched it again after the ball left his hands on the first try.

Back to R6-7Exception--- "The ball does not become dead until the try or tap ends...." The try ended with the second touching(obviously it can't go in now).

What you have here is just a second attempt at a "try", but unfortunately it's a second attempt with a dead ball. You can never count it. No basket and 2 FT's is the only call.

Are you people trying to tell me that a player who is fouled while tapping a ball can continue tapping the ball until he finally gets one to drop? Same thing, isn't it?

[gordon30307]

My call count the bucket shoot one and move on. If the shooter pulled that off give it to him (especially if he's airborne). If you wave off that basket and shoot two be ready to Tee the Coach (you'll never be able to explain it to him) and probably never get invited back to that school. I've never seen what's described and I doubt I ever will I have a tough time visualizing a dislodged ball (I'm assuming it leaves his hand completely) recovering while airborne (must have had antigravity boots on) and getting a shot off. MJ could do that but if a kid pulled this off you gotta give it to him count the bucket. JMO

Obviously this crew ruled inadvertant whistle.

[zebraman]

Jurassic,

By the strict letter of the law, you're probably right. However, I don't think the rules committee was factoring in the "mid-air bobble" specifically when they worded the rules you are referring to.

There are many, many times when a foul on a shooter causes the ball to dislodge ever so slightly from a shooter while they are in continuous motion but they play through it and we count the hoop. This one is a bit different because it sounds as if the ball is dislodged more than just a tiny bobble.

I still think I'd lean towards giving the benefit to the airborne shooter and going "and one" rather than nitpick and disallow the hoop and shoot two. Also, it would keep the coach of team A from popping a head gasket.

Z

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Are you people trying to tell me that a player who is fouled while tapping a ball can continue tapping the ball until he finally gets one to drop? Same thing, isn't it?

I'm on your side, Jurassic! I don't get a lot of chances to be right, so please don't yell at me!

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by gordon30307
My call count the bucket shoot one and move on. If the shooter pulled that off give it to him (especially if he's airborne). If you wave off that basket and shoot two be ready to Tee the Coach (you'll never be able to explain it to him) and probably never get invited back to that school. I've never seen what's described and I doubt I ever will I have a tough time visualizing a dislodged ball (I'm assuming it leaves his hand completely) recovering while airborne (must have had antigravity boots on) and getting a shot off. MJ could do that but if a kid pulled this off you gotta give it to him count the bucket. JMO

Obviously this crew ruled inadvertant whistle.

Wow!! What other rules do you disregard because the player made such a great move? Travelling? Carrying? Does your assignor know you're writing your own rule book as you go?

[paxsonref]

A tap is a completely different situation, as no control was had by the player prior to the try. . . .why penalize an athletic play if the original fumble is clearly not a try for goal.

In the situation listed, because the official was too quick to judgement, that really complicated matters, still not sure whith how they came up with what they did though. . .

[Maverick]

Originally posted by rainmaker

I'm on your side, Jurassic! I don't get a lot of chances to be right, so please don't yell at me!

I'm assuming the player isn't hanging in midair for several seconds while he is making those several tap attempts so this would be a different situation as the player is no longer an airborn shooter.

[Edited by Maverick on Jan 28th, 2005 at 01:53 PM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Maverick

I'm assuming the player isn't hanging in midair for several seconds while he is making those several tap attempts so this would be a totally different situation as the player is no longer an airborn shooter.

And.....what if the player is in the air for two taps and is fouled on the first? You gonna give him the basket if his second tap goes in?


Remember, the tap is a "try" too, and it also ends when it is obviously no good. It doesn't matter if the tap hits the board or not. If the tap leaves the shooter's hand, it still ends when the shooter touches it again.

Can you cite any rules that would negate the rules that I've cited?

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by paxsonref
how many times have we given continuation on a shot where the ball is knocked loose, clearly out of possesion, regained, then shot and made. . . I am going to give the shooter the benefit, since if the foul caused the shot to be that woefully off that it is still in reach of the player, I would most likely rule that not as a shot, but just as losing the handle on the ball, and reward the kid for making an athletic play by being able to regain control and make an attempt, and if he isnt able to get the shot back up, makes it that much easier, then we just shoot 2

sorry airborne shooter may have been the wrong way to word it according to the rule book, but hopefully my point is made


[Edited by paxsonref on Jan 28th, 2005 at 11:34 AM]

Replace A1 regaining with A2 getting the ball and putting it in.

[paxsonref]

My contention is that when the first time the ball left the shooters hands, it was not a try if the contact by the defender caused the ball to become dislodged, therefore, the try has never started and never ended, so the shooter should have the right to regain control of the ball and then make their try for goal. Now if you ruled the first release of the ball a try, then you are correct, but I have a tough time picturing that being a legitimate try considering the ball probably never got more than a foot from player. On a tap, you are right, you have pretty much one shot at that one, but that is because a tap is a try almost instantly.

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by paxsonref
My contention is that when the first time the ball left the shooters hands, it was not a try if the contact by the defender caused the ball to become dislodged, therefore, the try has never started and never ended, so the shooter should have the right to regain control of the ball and then make their try for goal. Now if you ruled the first release of the ball a try, then you are correct, but I have a tough time picturing that being a legitimate try considering the ball probably never got more than a foot from player. On a tap, you are right, you have pretty much one shot at that one, but that is because a tap is a try almost instantly.

Care to provide a rule or case play to defend your argument?

[paxsonref]

Sect 40 Art. 2
"......A player is trying for goal when the player has the ball and in the officials judgment is throwing or attempting to throw for goal. . . . "

As I stated earlier, the knocking of the ball loose from players possesion may not be considered a try (and again maybe it is, each play being unique) and therefore when the player regains possesion, may still attempt their original try

As I picture the play in my head, any release of the ball that stays close enough to the player for them to catch it regain control and shoot again before he lands is a pretty good chance that it wasnt a try for goal in the first place and it was merely a temporary loss of control due to the contact by the defender

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by paxsonref
My contention is that when the first time the ball left the shooters hands, it was not a try if the contact by the defender caused the ball to become dislodged, therefore, the try has never started and never ended, so the shooter should have the right to regain control of the ball and then make their try for goal.

Um, if it wasn't a try as you say above, then the ball is dead immediately when the foul occurred at the time of the ball being dislodged. That's rule 6-7-7. It doesn't matter what happens after that then. You can't have another, second try with a dead ball.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by paxsonref

As I picture the play in my head, any release of the ball that stays close enough to the player for them to catch it regain control and shoot again before he lands is a pretty good chance that it wasnt a try for goal in the first place and it was merely a temporary loss of control due to the contact by the defender

Again, it it wasn't a try for goal in the first place, then the foul makes the ball dead IMMEDIATELY by rule. You don't have an airborne shooter, continuation or nuthin'.

Can't have it both ways. The rules just don't allow it.

[Kelvin green]

My thought

Why did the refs score two and give B the baseline?

I can see two shots if the ball was knocked clearly loose.

I can see two plus one if the ball never left hand and it was a hit/bobble

But score two and award B the ball after the whistle has blown just does not work in my book
.