Next set!

#1) As the referee is checking the books at the 10-minute mark, he notices that A6 and A7 are wearing identical numbers. The referee rules no penalty can be assessed until they become players. Is the referee correct?My key says no, but I thought it was right. Why penalize it before we have to change the book?

This isn't a question, so much as an interesting play that we've talked about at length a couple of times and IAABO's "approved" ruling:

#2) Team A is trailing by 3 points when A1, in front of the Team B bench, attempts a 3-point try at the buzzer. B7 comes off the bench and blocks the ball just after A1 releases the ball. The horn sounds. Official charges Team B with a flagrant technical foul and awards Team A three FTs. Is the official correct?Answer key says Yes. Seems reasonable. Just wish there was a case play to back it up.

Aw, heck. Give B7 two Ts, one for entering the court unbeckoned, and one for unsportsmanlike conduct. And then assess team B a third T for having six men on the court! Now A gets six FTs... :D

Chuck, you <b>know</b> that there is no definitive answer to this one. It just isn't covered in the NFHS rules. IAABO is just guessing at the correct call, same as we've been doing in all our previous threads.

<b>DISCLAIMER:</b> Folks, please note that the IAABO answers to their own tests are only relevant to the very few states where they may have been appointed as the state governing body. Anywhere else...they have absolutely no relevancy at all. Iow, do NOT take any IAABO test answers that you see here as being a definitive and correct NFHS rules interpretation. They may be but it just ain't necessarily so.They certainly have issued wrong interpretations in the past.

Absolutely. That's why I explicitly said it was IAABO's approved ruling. There is no FED approved ruling. But this is the first thing in writing I've seen for anybody, so I thought I'd share it.

Now what about the identical numbers?

Penalized when discovered, as per R10-1-2(e)PENALTY. The referee discovered it at the 10 minute mark-- so he has to penalize it.

Ok, just so I'm straight, are we talking A6 and A7 having the same numbers listed in the book, or you just happened to notice during warm-ups that they were wearing the same uniform number?

And...are the numbers 0 and 00? ;)

Ok, anyway, the reason I asked is because if they were listed as identical numbers in the book, then yes, at the 10 minute mark it should be penalized. But the way the question is worded, it says, "he notices that A6 and A7 are wearing identical numbers". If that's the case, and the book looks ok, then I wouldn't penalize until the one with the number different than what's listed in the book comes into the game.

Me and a couple other officials talked about this play and by rule we all thought there isn't anything you can do within the limits of the rules, but after thinking about it I think there is.

Let me first say that in this case you cannot assess a flagrant technical because the ball is not dead and you can't assess a flagrant foul because there is no contact with the player. You also can't award three free throws for a flagrant technical, because it is dead ball contact.

I do believe though you can award a T for an unsporting act, and a team T for more than 5 players being on the floor while the ball is live, thus awarding the other team 4 free throws.

I lost my rule book and casebook a little while back though so if I am wrong about any of it I would like to know. I am just saying this by memory, and not a very good one at that

I don't see why not. The ball being live has nothing to do with whether or not you can assess a flagrant T.


I don't see why not. A flagrant foul does not have to involve contact.

Well, you're 0-for-3, b/c it's NOT dead ball contact. You're not even consistent with what you've written above. There was no contact on the shooter at all (which is what you said in the second passage above). And the block occured during a live ball (which is what you said in the first passage above). So there's no way to view this as dead ball contact.

This seems very reasonable to me.

In our previous discussion of this we spent a little while wondering if you could award 3 shots for a T. I can't seem to remember what machinations we had to go thru to make it ok, but somebody came up with a pretty good rationale.

See 3.2.2B (that's from the 2003-2004 Book, the only one handy at the moment)

By rule you are saying that you can have a flagrant T during a live ball.

A flagrant foul doesn't have to involve contact? I am confused then, because to my knowledge, there are no types of fouls in the rulebook that you can call that involve no contact.

In my third passage I was just making that note as a side bar, I was trying to say that if someone assessed a flagrant technical you can't award three FTs because it is a technical and all technicals in HS carry a penalty of 2 free throws. Also as a side bar I meant to say that you can call a flagrant foul on a three if you deem the CONTACT unecessary and excessive and then award three FTs.

Lastly, I don't know much about IAABO, but do they make their own rulings about plays and not follow NFHS rulings, because you make it sound like the board found a rationale to award three free throws. And on that topic if the board is going to come up with a penalty for it, why not find a way to award the kid more than three free throws, because the kid coming off the bench to block the shot in my eyes is unbecoming to the game of basketball and how it is supposed to be played. Therefore, I would find a way to award the team a chance to win the game. That might just be me though.

1) By rule you are saying that you can have a flagrant T during a live ball.
A flagrant foul doesn't have to involve contact? I am confused then, because to my knowledge, there are no types of fouls in the rulebook that you can call that involve no contact.

2) Lastly, I don't know much about IAABO, but do they make their own rulings about plays and not follow NFHS rulings, because you make it sound like the board found a rationale to award three free throws.
[/B][/QUOTE]1) No, unsporting technical fouls do not have to involve contact and can also be deemed flagrant. They can occur during either live or dead balls.Example---> "F**k you, ref".

2) IAABO is an association that basketball officials may, or in the case of some states, have to join. In some north-eastern states, they have been mandated by the governing state high school body as the official state referee's association. As such, they act as the official interpreter of NFHS rules in that particular state. IAABO also issues their own rules examination to their members each year. That examination may have errors in it and IABBO may also make some inaccurate rules interpretations too. No biggie- because the NFHS itself has made errors quite a few times on it's own exams.

If you would like more info, here's their web site:

http://www.iaabo.org/

1) No, unsporting technical fouls do not have to involve contact and can also be deemed flagrant. They can occur during either live or dead balls.Example---> "F**k you, ref".

2) IAABO is an association that basketball officials may, or in the case of some states, have to join. In some north-eastern states, they have been mandated by the governing state high school body as the official state referee's association. As such, they act as the official interpreter of NFHS rules in that particular state. IAABO also issues their own rules examination to their members each year. That examination may have errors in it and IABBO may also make some inaccurate rules interpretations too. No biggie- because the NFHS itself has made errors quite a few times on it's own exams.

If you would like more info, here's their web site:

http://www.iaabo.org/ [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree with you JR about the flagrant T, I thought about that when I was writing the reply but it didn't seem to fit with my argument. I should have wrote my reply like the NFHS rulebook with the "EXCEPTION" part right underneath it.

1. I'd say no, 20 minutes before game you can give out calls, so no- call it right away.

2. seams right to me

and as always when I post it's fiba rules

What is it about this sitch and August?
 

I do not believe 3 shots can be awarded for a T. Fed: It specifically states that a T is 2 + possession + seatbelt. Some other tool must be used to give A the chance to win.

Here are threads from the past.

http://www.officialforum.com/thread/15080
Started by Jay R, Aug 23, 2004

http://www.officialforum.com/thread/5533
Started by Chuck, Aug 1, 2002


I particularily was interested in one post describing A's chances of hitting 3 of 3 FTs. A 70% FT shooter will hit 3/3 only 34% of the time. Dan did say that he'd correct that statistical error, though.

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Aug 31st, 2005 at 08:54 PM]