The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 11:57am
Huck Finn
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 3,347
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.
__________________
"Be more concerned with your character than your reputation, because your character is what you really are, while your reputation is merely what others think you are." -- John Wooden
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 11:59am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally posted by tomegun
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?
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 12:05pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally posted by rainmaker
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Basket interference by the defense. The exception to the BI rule applies only and solely to the player trying to dunk. As there is no rule saying that they don't also apply, The BI restrictions still must apply to the other 9 players on the floor.
It seems obvious that that's the intent of the rule. But the wording is poor, as usual. Just taking the rule with the words as written, Chuck's right that if the defender was touching the ball before it entered the cylinder, it's legal for that touching to continue. I think we can let the rules committee off the hook, though, since the chances of this happening in a Fed game are probably about 99.99 against.

I'd be interested in hearing if the NCAA wording and general interp would be different.
NFHS Rule 9 SECTION 11 BASKET INTERFERENCE
...
EXCEPTION: In Articles 1 or 2, 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...

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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 01:25pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust
NFHS Rule 9 SECTION 11 BASKET INTERFERENCE
...
EXCEPTION: In Articles 1 or 2, 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...

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.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 01:35pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by BktBallRef
Quote:
Originally posted by Camron Rust
NFHS Rule 9 SECTION 11 BASKET INTERFERENCE
...
EXCEPTION: In Articles 1 or 2, 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...

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: "Dunking or stuffing is legal and is not basket interference". The whole EXCEPTION, as I read it, therefore relates only 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]
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 01:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
The whole EXCEPTION, as I read it, therefore relates only 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 put that clarification at the end. It would be extraneous and wouldn't be needed at all.
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]
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 01:46pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by BktBallRef
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
The whole EXCEPTION, as I read it, therefore relates only 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 put that clarification at the end. It would be extraneous and wouldn't be needed at all.
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 should be allowed to block that dunk w/o committing BI.
Yabut......the rules don't say that.

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

Gotta go with what's written imo.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 01:50pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Thumbs down

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

"...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."

You're the one that says this is referring to the offensive player only. The rule book does not say offensive player only.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 01:56pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,105
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Yabut......the rules don't say that.

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

Gotta go with what's written imo.
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.
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 01:58pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by BktBallRef
LOL! Yeah, the rules do say that. You're just ignoring it and interpreting the way you want it to read.

"...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."

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

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.
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 02:04pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,211
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Yabut......the rules don't say that.

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

Gotta go with what's written imo.
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.
There's no way to logically not 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.
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 02:28pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Yabut......the rules don't say that.

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

Gotta go with what's written imo.
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.
There's no way to logically not 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'?
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 02:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Yabut......the rules don't say that.

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

Gotta go with what's written imo.
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.
There's no way to logically not 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.
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.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #29 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 02:47pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
What if the player attempts to dunk the ball in his opponent's basket?

BI?

Or nuthin'?
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.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Tue May 31, 2005, 02:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,616
Thumbs up

Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
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.

You are correct.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:57am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1