New violation: unintended advantage?

[Back In The Saddle]

Since the new leaving the court violation appears to apply to both teams, I can see some teams trying to kill an opponent's breakaway layup by leaving the court.

This would give the defense a huge advantage. What is the proper way to handle this? My immediate reaction is to pass on this call, maybe even warn the offender and call an unsporting T the next time. But I haven't seen this addressed anywhere.

Surely there was discussion about this situation when the swinging the elbows violation was new? What was decided about that?

[mick]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
Since the new leaving the court violation appears to apply to both teams, I can see some teams trying to kill an opponent's breakaway layup by leaving the court.

Back In The Saddle,
If you choose to make the call, use you Fox after the breakaway.
mick

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by mick

Back In The Saddle,
If you choose to make the call, use you Fox after the breakaway.
mick

How do you square that with the rules? The penalty explicity says that "the ball is dead when the violation occurs." I don't see how, by rule, you can have a delayed whistle on this. You either have to pass on the call entirely or cancel the result of the play and bring the ball back to the spot of the violation (which could be clear back to the far endline if that's where the opponent left the court).

[mick]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
I don't see how, by rule, you can have a delayed whistle on this. You either have to pass on the call entirely or cancel the result of the play and bring the ball back to the spot of the violation (which could be clear back to the far endline if that's where the opponent left the court).

Back In The Saddle,
I do not have to do that, but if that works for you, you are all set.
mick

[refnrev]

[/B][/QUOTE]How do you square that with the rules? The penalty explicity says that "the ball is dead when the violation occurs." I don't see how, by rule, you can have a delayed whistle on this. You either have to pass on the call entirely or cancel the result of the play and bring the ball back to the spot of the violation (which could be clear back to the far endline if that's where the opponent left the court).
[/B][/QUOTE]

__________________________________________________ _________

Back in the Saddle, I don't understand why you don't think you CAN have a delayed whistle on this. It would be the same as whacking a coach or player who mouthed off at you before a scoring opportunity by the other team after the made basket, would it not?

[BktBallRef]

Good grief.

The violation for leaving the floor is obviously meant to address situations where an offensive player goes OOB to gain an advantage.

The rule hasn't changed, just the penalty. Did you previously ever make this call? Are you suddenly going to go out and call this 10 times a game now, just because the penalty changed?

Does it say that it addresses the offensive team only? No. But Judas Priest, can we use just a little bit of common sense here?

Stop making things harder than they actually are.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by refnrev

How do you square that with the rules? The penalty explicity says that "the ball is dead when the violation occurs." I don't see how, by rule, you can have a delayed whistle on this. You either have to pass on the call entirely or cancel the result of the play and bring the ball back to the spot of the violation (which could be clear back to the far endline if that's where the opponent left the court).
[/B][/QUOTE]

__________________________________________________ _________

Back in the Saddle, I don't understand why you don't think you CAN have a delayed whistle on this. It would be the same as whacking a coach or player who mouthed off at you before a scoring opportunity by the other team after the made basket, would it not? [/B][/QUOTE]Well I'm not opposed to holding the whistle on this, but the rules don't support it. There is a case play to support holding the whistle on the T. Perhaps there will be one to support this call as well.

I guess I'll have to break down and buy the case book as soon as it's avialable too.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
Good grief.

The violation for leaving the floor is obviously meant to address situations where an offensive player goes OOB to gain an advantage.

The rule hasn't changed, just the penalty. Did you previously ever make this call? Are you suddenly going to go out and call this 10 times a game now, just because the penalty changed?

Does it say that it addresses the offensive team only? No. But Judas Priest, can we use just a little bit of common sense here?

Stop making things harder than they actually are.

Good morning, Tony. Rough week?

[Camron Rust]

Ignore it. The violation is to prevent a team from gaining an advantage by going OOB. You most certainly don't want to make it an advantage by blowing the whistle. We have precedent on this with the throwin plane violation in the last 5 seconds of a game where the case book clearly says to ignore it when the violating team will benefit.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle

Good morning, Tony. Rough week?

Nope. Are you bored? It would seem so. You're making a lot out of nothing with some of this stuff.

Obviously you wouldn't stop the play. The defense isn't gaining an advantage by going OOB. That's why mick was trying to tell you. That's what Camron is telling you.

[Edited by BktBallRef on Jul 30th, 2005 at 04:30 PM]

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
How do you square that with the rules? The penalty explicity says that "the ball is dead when the violation occurs." I don't see how, by rule, you can have a delayed whistle on this. You either have to pass on the call entirely or cancel the result of the play and bring the ball back to the spot of the violation (which could be clear back to the far endline if that's where the opponent left the court).

By rule, yup.

By common sense (and wanting to leave the gym alive), nope.

[rainmaker]

I think part of the problem is that there haven't been a lot of defensive violations in the past. The only ones I can think of before this are the kicked ball, and goaltending and BI. Last year they added the elbows thing, but that's still mostly going to be offensive. And there haven't been any violations away from the ball (except the elbows thing now). Since this is basically a new category of infraction, it could appear that previous assumptions are now up in the air. I would expect it to take a year or two for an accepted interp to settle into place.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by rainmaker
I think part of the problem is that there haven't been a lot of defensive violations in the past. The only ones I can think of before this are the kicked ball, and goaltending and BI.

Out of bounds?

[lukealex]

Originally posted by rainmaker
Last year they added the elbows thing, but that's still mostly going to be offensive.

What is the elbows thing? Something I just can't think of right now maybe? Probably.

[Stat-Man]

What is the elbows thing? Something I just can't think of right now maybe? Probably

Excessive swinging of the elbows. You'll usually see this when a player secures a rebound, but it is also possible a defender could do this too, or have it happen with no team control (scramble for a rebound).