I have a question.

Even if it is BI, who would call it?

I know I wouldn't. There are many people of different levels that would of had a foul.

The popcorn guy? ;)

NFHS Rule 9 SECTION 11 BASKET INTERFERENCE
...
EXCEPTION: In Articles 1 or 2, if <FONT COLOR=RED><B>a player</B></FONT> has his/her hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a violation if such contact with the ball continues after it enters a basket cylinder...

I fail to see what's unclear about this. No BI. The exception says "a player", not a specific player. If the defender had his hand in contact with the ball before it entered the cylinder, his hand may legally remain in contact with it even if it enters the cylinder. The shooter doesn't get a free bucket for being able to push the blocker's hand over the rim.

I agree with Camron. The NFHS rule does not specify the offensive player. It says "a player."

The NBA rule does however specify the offensive player.

The NFHS certainly does specify the offensive player- right at the end of the EXCEPTION in R4-6.

The NFHS rule,as part of the EXCEPTION, very explicitly states: <b>"Dunking or stuffing is legal and is not basket interference"</b>. The whole EXCEPTION, as I read it, therefore relates <b>only</b> to someone trying to dunk or stuff the ball. If they wanted the EXCEPTION to relate to all of the players on the floor, they wouldn't have had to put that clarification at the end. It would be extraneous and wouldn't be needed at all.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on May 31st, 2005 at 02:37 PM]

Nope, not buying it. It doesn't say that the exception is just for the offensive player. If blocking a dunk attempt were illegal, they would have specified the offensive player only, just as the NBA rule does. The last statement is simply saying that dunking /stuffing is legal, nothing more, nothing less.

If an offensive player is allowed to dunk w/o committing BI, then there's no reason that a defender shouldn't be allowed to block that dunk w/o committing BI.

[Edited by BktBallRef on May 31st, 2005 at 02:47 PM]

Yabut......the rules <b>don't</b> say that.

Rule 4-6-2 <b>does</b> say that it's BI and there's nuthin' in the EXCEPTION that says otherwise.

Gotta go with what's written imo.

LOL! Yeah, the rules do say that. You're just ignoring it and interpreting the way you want it to read.

<B>"...if a player has his/her hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a violation if such contact with the ball continues after it enters a basket cylinder or if in such action, the player touches the basket."</b>

You're the one that says this is referring to the offensive player only. The rule book does not say offensive player only.

As I said on the previous page, I disagree with your interp precisely b/c I'm going only by what's written. What's written is:

1) a player (offense/defense not specified) is allowed to maintain contact with the ball in the cylinder if s/he first contacted the ball outside the cylinder; and

2) dunking is legal.

That's all that is written. There is no way logically to take that and read it as (1) applies only to the offensive player simply b/c (2) only applies to the offensive player.

You left the last sentence of your rules citation above completely out. You know, the part that clarifies to whom the EXCEPTION relates. Any special reason for doing that? :D

The part of the EXCEPTION that you left out specifically refers to the player dunking or stuffing the ball. Nowhere in that EXCEPTION is any other player on the floor referred to or mentioned. That's what you keep ignoring.

Guess we'll have to differ on this one.

There's no way to logically <b>not</b> take it that way imo. The EXCEPTION specifically mentions one player on the floor only- the player trying to dunk the ball. There's no reason to extrapolate that EXCEPTION to include the other 9 players. If they wanted it that way, there woulda been no need to add that last sentence of the EXCEPTION at all. It's in there for a reason imo.

Guess we'll have to disagree on this one too.

What if the player attempts to dunk the ball in his opponent's basket?

BI?

Or nuthin'?

I think the rules are trying to list two different scenerios - 1)a player (not specifically offense or defense) maintaining contact with the ball into the cylinder, and 2)dunking is legal. Obviously they added dunking because the act, in itself, is BI, and the game has changed to allow that act. If all they wanted to address was the offense and dunking, I think it would've been included as a single exception, not two different exceptions.

Now, to the realistic aspects of the call - have you ever made that call, or seen that call made in HS or NCAA, on a play just like the described play? I have never seen a BI call made when two players had contact with the ball. What if the offense goes up to dunk, the defense puts a hand on the ball outside the cylinder, the arm, hand, and part of the ball go into the cylinder, then come back out, and both players come down with the ball? I would suspect it would be hard to explain the BI call when everyone would be expecting a jump ball. In the case of the Duncan/Stoudamire play, there's even a little disagreement after many replays whether the defense had the ball before it entered the cylinder, so I would have been watching for a foul since it wasn't a clear-cut BI call.

I hope this would only happen in some men's rec league game somewhere, which is why I don't do rec leagues anymore.

I call BI, give 2 points to the opponent, and give it back to the player's team for a spot throw-in.

Then we will shooting T's somewhere, I'm sure of it. ;)

You are correct.