Funny incident Saturday.

My son plays in a HS varsity fall league. At one point, the referee called a double foul underneath. After reporting the foul, they proceeded to administer the throw-in by giving the ball to the offense on the baseline. The opposing coach, and a few people in the small crowd (also, a small gym), started complaining that he should go to the arrow. The ref stopped before he gave the ball to A1, walked out to the FT extended, and told the assembled crowd about the rule change. He then asked if anyone learned anything "today". Most of us raised our hands. My wife leaned over and said, "I learned two things. I didn't know the previous rule, either." It was a smart, nice gesture by the ref. Unfortunate that rules knowledge can't be dealt with that way more often.

Another funny - funny, peculiar - thing: throughout the game, both refs (two-man) had "apprentice" referees shadowing them. The apprentice refs mimic'd the calls, the counts, etc. It was strange to watch. I think I would have been embarrassed to do it. It was useful, though, in that, at every break the refs would explain things to the apprentices.

Not to be nit-picky, but where was the ball when the double foul occured?

Other than that question, I agree that I like the way the ref handled it in that situation. Seems like an appropriate time and place, if you're going to try that sort of thing.

It was underneath. Post players jockeying for position.

Have you ever seen, or been a part of, a teaching situation like they used (i.e., shadowing)?

You said the foul was underneath. Where was the ball when the foul occured? Was it also in the post?

Yes, but not for basketball. For lacrosse, I worked this way with new guys.

I've worked on the floor, while a clinician ran up and down the sidelines, but I've never shadowed someone else that way.

Ah, I understand, Chuck. The foul must have been off-ball, because, like the typical fan, I didn't see it!

So, lets say the ball was on the perimeter when the double foul was called. Would the ball be put in play on the sideline?

:D Honesty!!

Yes, that's correct. After a double foul, the new rule says that the ball is put in play at the point of interruption. This is different from what we usually see, which is putting the ball in play at the spot closest to where the foul occured.

Hmm, this particular element if the change hadn't occurred to me. I hadn't considered that "point of interruption" was to include the location of the ball...just who had possession.

Could it not also be interpreted to be the location of the foul since that is the point of the interruption? The interruption is the foul.

In a word, no. The game resumes exactly as it was when it was stopped. Since the ball was "on the perimeter", a sideline throw-in is how we resume. The "point" of interruption is not a place on the court.

The rule is very clear on this point. It's not just my interpretation. 4-36-2a says that play shall be resumed by "a throw-in to the team that was in control at a spot nearest to where the ball was located when the stoppage occurred."

[Edited by ChuckElias on Sep 26th, 2005 at 04:54 PM]

Long Pass
 

How does Point of Interruption apply when the ball is in flight during a pass when the "interruption" occurred? Does it go back to where the ball was last controlled by a player?

I haven't seen a case play on that sitch, but I would say that "you are where you were until you get where you're going" also applies to the ball. So put the ball back in play at the point closest to where the pass was released.

so.....you'll do that for a whistle but you won't do it if it was a horn.

Interesting.

So....now who has the mean streak? ;)

Thanks for the quote on the new rule...don't yet have my new books. It is quite clear from what you posted that it is where the ball is located when the foul occurs.

Why? Based on your earlier post, it would be where the ball was located when the foul occurs. Why would it be any different if it was not under player control? If the ball is in mid-pass, that's is the spot that will be used to determine the throwin spot.

Scenario: A is down 1 with 5 seconds to go. A inbounds the ball deep in the backcourt to A1 who throws a long pass over a press to a breaking A4. Just before the pass arrives, A4 and B4 commit a double foul (not likely to happen but just assume it does for the sake of the discussion). If you go with a spot near the source of the pass, A will lose the time on the clock for the time that the ball was in the air and also the distance down the floor. I don' think this could be the desired outcome.

The only way the clock would be running legally is if the throw-in was after an made basket. Time out, clock stopped; GT or BI, clock stopped; any sort of a spot throw-in, clock stopped.

In the only case of your play, yes, time would run off the clock until the foul was called. But now the clock is stopped for the next throw-in. Does A get the short end of the deal time wise? No. The ensuing inbounds pass is with the clock stopped.

Would A get to run the base line? I don't know.





[Edited by Ref in PA on Sep 27th, 2005 at 12:38 PM]

I do! :)

7-5-7 ". . . After a goal or awarded goal as in 7-4-3, the team not credited with the score shall make the throw-in from the end of the court where the goal was made and from any point outside the end line. A team retains this privilege if the scoring team commits a violation or common foul (before the bonus is in effect) and the ensuing throw-in spot would have been on the end line. Any player of the team may make a direct throw-in or he/she may pass the ball along the end line to a teammate(s) outside the boundary line."

Is this a common foul by the defense?

"ART. 2 . . . A common foul is a personal foul which is neither flagrant nor intentional nor committed against a player trying or tapping for a field goal nor a part of a double, simultaneous or multiple foul."


Nope, it's a double foul. Therefore, no running.


However, I agree with Camron that the nearest spot to the location of the ball is correct by the new POI rule. The wording of that new rule is quite clear.
So where is that?
The NFHS needs to look at their definition of ball location very closely.
Right now we have, 4-4-3 ". . . A ball which is in flight retains the same location as when it was last in contact with a player or the court."

Is this really telling us the spot of the ball or is it only talking about frontcourt/backcourt and inbounds/out-of-bounds status? I think the latter, but a strict reading of the rules as written would seem to support the former.


Lastly, it was a great point by Chuck originally that we now go with the ball's location, not the foul's location for the double foul play.

I also think the latter. The ball is where the ball is.