Given the rest of tmp44's description, we already know it's a portable basket support :D so IMO you don't really need the $10 word when the $1 word will do.

It was :cool: to learn what stanchion means.

But I'm willing to bet a week's worth of game fees that if you approached 50 people, less than five would know what it means.

Another good question might be why nobody has a "T" on A1 for grabbing the basket - under FED rule 10-3-4.

No, it's not illegal to grab the goal while the ball is in the cylinder.

[/B][/QUOTE]Even when the grabbing is <b>not</b> done to prevent an injury? :confused:

An interesting point JR--one that in fact had never occurred to me. My question is does 10-3-4 cover grasping and pulling on the net or just the rim? I know I've only seen it called (as I'm sure is the case with almost all of us) when A1 dunks and pulls down on the rim in a showboating type manner.

That being said, the T would not have been enforced in this sitch because it would have had no bearing on the end of the game (recall that the BI was at the buzzer and gave Team B a 1 point victory). But let me take this one step further--let's say the BI occurs to TIE the game--could one foreseeably call the BI and the T? I ask that for 2 reasons.

1) I wouldn't have the cojones to make that call--let the kids decide it in OT; but more importantly

2) Is this possible? I ask that for this reason. Say A1 goes for a layup, B1 slaps the backboard, wiping out the shot and getting a T assessed. Would the same scenerio happen here? Wipe out the shot and assess the T instead? I tend to think not, but this may create a nice little discussion.....

(1)My question is does 10-3-4 cover grasping and pulling on the net or just the rim? I know I've only seen it called (as I'm sure is the case with almost all of us) when A1 dunks and pulls down on the rim in a showboating type manner.

(2) But let me take this one step further--let's say the BI occurs to TIE the game--could one foreseeably call the BI and the T?
(3) Say A1 goes for a layup, B1 slaps the backboard, wiping out the shot and getting a T assessed. Would the same scenerio happen here? Wipe out the shot and assess the T instead?
[/B][/QUOTE]Rule 10-3-4 sez it's a T to grasp the <b>basket</b>. The net and the rim are both part of the basket, as per FED rule 1-10-1. Grabbing either without doing so to prevent an injury is a T.

(2) Yes, you can call both BI and a T on the same play.See the language in case book play 9.11.4.

(3) Whoa. You got this one completely wrong from the git-go. Slapping the backboard <b>NEVER</b> wipes out a shot. <b.NEVER!!!</b> And it's not a T to slap the backboard if you rule that the player did so while legitimately attempting to block a shot.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Jun 28th, 2005 at 08:45 AM]

JR...Bad description...meant this in the "hit the backboard causing the backboard to shake" resulting in a T sense. My bad. That being said, and correct me if I'm wrong and if so I stand corrected, but I thought I have read on here multiple times that if this T is called, the one for causing the basket to shake, that the shot is wiped out and the Technicals are shot instead? Am I wrong here? If so, where the he!! my brain today?

1) Yes, you're wrong. You get the T, and the shot is good or not based on its own merit.

2) You're brain is apparently stuck up your stanchion. ;)

3) While not quite the sample size that someome (cancuckref?) requested, I just asked 10 people -- all knew what a stanchion was.

Thanks, Bob. Who knows where I got that info...probably from someone who doesn't know what a stanchion is :o .

Eh, I'm guessing none of those 10 were Canadian, ya hoser.

As Bob said, your head is up your stanchion.

Why do I get the feeling that we might just be seeing a <b>whole</b> lot of usage of that phrase here in the future? :D

It is not a T to cause the backboard to shake if it was during a legitimate attempt at blocking a shot. Shots are NEVER wiped out in these situations unless BI or goaltending is involved. There's a good explanation for you to read in case book play 10.3.5.

<u>Casebook Play 10.3.5</u>
A1 tries for goal and (a)B1 jumps and attempts to block the shot but instead slaps or strikes the backboard and the ball goes into the basket or (b)B1 vibrates the ring as a result of <b>pulling on the net</b> and the ball does not enter the basket.
<b>RULING:</b> In (a) legal and the basket counts and (b) a technical foul is charged to B1 and there is no basket.
<b>COMMENT:</b> The purpose of the rule is to penalize intentional contact with the backboard while a shot or try is involved or placing a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage.A player who strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is attempt to draw attention to the player, or as means of venting frustration may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to rule 10-3-7.

Thanks for bringing that up - I tried to post it yesterday but my internet connection went out. Uh, yeah . . . that's it. :p

By my reading of the 'moving basket ring' BI rule, the basket moved - whether there's a spring or not, it's not stated.

Also, if your assignor doesn't want you to call BI, call the T.

Call the technical - otherwise you ARE deciding the game by intentionally ignoring a rule.

YOU already knew it was a portable basket support. I spaced that part out.

Chuck was helping ME when he used the word "stanchion". I had spaced that part, but he was politely helping me remember it by using slightly different words.

It would depend on which 50 people you approached, wouldn't it?

Even when the grabbing is <b>not</b> done to prevent an injury? :confused: [/B][/QUOTE]

Speaking in the context of basket interference only.

Speaking in the context of basket interference only. [/B][/QUOTE]

Huh :confused: ??