I know this has come up before and I am fairly certain I know the answer but....
A1 is setting up in the paint looking for a pass and has been there about 2 seconds when the pass comes in and is then dropped by A1 . Ball remains in the key as does A1 as he tries to regain control of the now loose ball, this battle goes on for about 4 or 5 seconds .
Since Team A still has team control can I call 3 seconds ? If I can call 3 seconds would any of you ever call it ?
I checked the case book and rule book and could find nothing that really spelled this out .
Thanks and sorry for bringing this one back up....

In NCAA, the 3-second count continues. This is stated explicitly in AR 16 (pg.129).

In FED, the 3-second count continues, but I can't remember the explicit citation. It was changed a couple years ago and I thought there was a case play, but I can't find it. The 3-second count used to be discontinued during an interrupted dribble, but then they deleted that exception. Can't find it now. . .

If you are being technical, calling 3 seconds would be the proper call. If it is not clear if B would get the ball, I would do my best to not make that call unless A gets the ball back. By rule if team control has not been lost you would have a 3 second call. I just do not think that would be my first concern.

Peace

From "COMMENTS ON THE 2002-03 RULES REVISIONS" from that year's rule book:

<b>THREE-SECOND RESTRICTIONS REMAIN IN EFFECT DURING AN INTERRUPTED DRIBBLE(9-7):</b>
<i>This rule change deletes the requirement for the three-second count to be terminated during an interrupted dribble. By rule, team control remains in effect during an interrupted dribble, therefore the three-second restrictions should also apply. Also by definition, an interrupted dribble occurs when the ball is "loose". Team control continues (as does the three-second restriction). Therefore the rules applying to a loose ball and an interrupted dribble should be the same".</i>

Basically, the FED just simplified the rule down to say 3-seconds applies anytime there is team control in the front court.

Nice find Jurassic , thanks for your help !
I know we don't pander to the crowd/coaches but I can imagine the reaction of both if a 3 second call was made in the situation described above . I think the coaches eyes would glaze over when I gave him the explanation....then he would puke on my shoes and then I would be forced to run him .
I think my counting to 3 will get a lot longer in this instance !

Actually, the NFHS does give allowances for a player to be in the lane for over 3 seconds.

9-7-3
Allowance shall be made for a player who, having been in the restricted area for less than three seconds, dribbles in or moves immediately to try for goal.

Edited for a case play:
9.7.2
The count on a player in the restricted area is suspended when that player begins a try for goal.



[Edited by RookieDude on Nov 21st, 2005 at 12:56 PM]

We're talkin' loose balls here
 

We're talkin' loose balls here - the 'allowance is for a player dribbling in or trying for goal.

Said player could, conceivably, shake and bake for 5-seconds. I have been looking for this for years so I could call 5-seconds . . .

Re: We're talkin' loose balls here
 

We're talkin' loose balls here - the 'allowance is for a player dribbling in or trying for goal.

Said player could, conceivably, shake and bake for 5-seconds. I have been looking for this for years so I could call 5-seconds . . . [/B][/QUOTE]Nope, you're misunderstanding the allowance. Said player can't shake and bake for 5 seconds. The allowance applies only to a player dribbling directly <b>to</b> the basket or finishing a move to score. The allowance doesn't include shake-n-baking or stopping for head fakes or any other kinda fakes. That's not the purpose or intent of the rule.

Yep, what Jurassic just said. Shake and bake doesn't work here. 3 doesn't = 5

Huh
 

I'm saying if you're closely guarded in the lane for five seconds while making a move which temporarily exempts you from a 3-second violation, that's it, it's a five second violation. You say no?

Depends on when my closely guarded count started. If the offensive player was outside the paint when LGP was established & I stared my count a second or two before he dribbled into the paint, then I might make the 5 second call. Otherwise, if he was farting around in the paint for that long I've probably got a three second violation.

Please note the words "immediately" and "begins a try" in the rules sections you cited. If the defense is good enough to make the offensive player significantly hesitate or delay beginning the try for 3 seconds, the act is clearly no longer immediate. IMHO the intent of the rules cited is not to penalize good defense.

Exactly. The rule is intended to let you complete a try that you started before your original 3-seconds was up.

If you hesitate to "shake-n-bake", you're gonna get called. That's not the intent of the allowance.

Re: Re: We're talkin' loose balls here
 

Nope, you're misunderstanding the allowance. Said player can't shake and bake for 5 seconds. The allowance applies only to a player dribbling directly <b>to</b> the basket or finishing a move to score. The allowance doesn't include shake-n-baking or stopping for head fakes or any other kinda fakes. That's not the purpose or intent of the rule. [/B][/QUOTE]

So you're saying it doesn't include anything that wouldn't be included in continuous motion?

And that the faking isn't part of continuous motion?

Re: Re: Re: We're talkin' loose balls here
 

So you're saying it doesn't include anything that wouldn't be included in continuous motion?

And that the faking isn't part of continuous motion? [/B][/QUOTE]Yes. You have to go straight to the hoop. No stopping and then head-faking to get the defender off their feet. If you stopped to "shake-n-bake" any time during continuous motion or the dribble, the allowance doesn't apply. Of course, anything the shooter does in the air is OK- until s/he comes down.

Duly noted
 

What about this scenario: A1, high up in the lane, receives a pass, turns and faces up, upfakes, dribbles to the basket, abrubtly stops the dribble by catching the ball while in the air, upfakes, and, when B1 goes to one side, pivots legally and attempts a layup.

Are you going to call 3-seconds during this sequence? My observation is that officials do not interpret "Begins a try" as limited to "continuous motion". A1 can do more 'stuff' once s/he has begun a try than continuous motion would allow.

The sequence for A1, above, could consume 5-seconds. It's unlikely, no doubt, but I'm just making the point that a 5-second violation is a kind of (somewhat academic) limit on how long the 'allowance' in the lane can possibly endure.

Re: Duly noted
 

could possibly endure.

Re: Duly noted
 

No, it couldn't; b/c if the above sequence took longer than 3-seconds, then it would be a 3 seconds violation at the "red" upfake. Once he pulls the ball down after the fake, he's no longer making a move to the basket.

Re: Re: Duly noted
 

What?

As he pulls the ball down he's stepping towards the basket for his layup.

If we take your advice the whistle will sound as the ball is hitting the backboard on the layup.

Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

What you describe is not an upfake. An upfake is the fake of a jumpshot: standing on the ground, then moving the ball and head up to simulate jumping, then bringing the head and ball back down while the defender jumps.

If the ballhandler attempts that move, he doesn't get to put the ball up.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

I know what an upfake is & I disagree.

A1 can certainly bring the ball back down while stepping around his defender.

Re: Re: Re: We're talkin' loose balls here
 

No. It's not.

Re: Duly noted
 

What about this scenario: A1, high up in the lane, receives a pass, turns and faces up, upfakes, dribbles to the basket, <font color = red>abrubtly stops the dribble by catching the ball while in the air</font>, upfakes, and, when B1 goes to one side, pivots legally and attempts a layup.

[/B][/QUOTE]If the player stopped their dribble to the basket, then that's when the exception ends. If the count is at 3 by that time, it's a violation. The player can dribble <b>directly</b> to the basket and then shoot, but that player <b>cannot</b> stop anytime during that sequence. Iow, you can dribble straight to the basket and put the ball up-- but nuthin' else- no fakes, no pauses, no nuthin'. Similarly, if they're into a shooting motion, they must complete that motion without stopping to fake.

Re: Re: Duly noted
 

The dribble ends sometime during a lay-up -- and I wouldn't call the violation then.

IMO, as long as the player with the ball is looking at the basket (and I don't mean that literally), I'm not inclined to call a three-second violation, no matter how many times s/he fakes. If s/he looks to pass, or actually passes the ball, I'll get the violation. And, no, I don't have any cases that specifically say this.

Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

And ya know what, so would Chuck, regardless of what he says here. I've seen him flagrantly disregard & ignore this rule in person.

Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

I wouldn't either, <b>if</b> the player with the ball seamlessly went from the the dribble to the lay-up or dunk. If the dribbler goes to the bucket, but stops and then head-fakes or sumthin' like that without immediately shooting, then I'm calling it. That's the purpose and intent of the allowance imo.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

He certainly can, but that's not what I would ever call an upfake. If the player is still moving to the basket, fine. But if the player moves away from the basket -- as he would do in an upfake -- his immediate attempt to score has ended. And if I'm already up to 5 (as in the original example), that gets a whistle.

Re: Duly noted
 

I really don't think I would. If you're gonna stand in the lane and do 50 headfakes, you're gonna get a whistle. That's always the way I've been taught, and I really believe it. I'm not just arguing for the sake of it. You don't get 7 seconds (2+ in the lane, and then 5 closely-guarded) instead of 3 just b/c you're working on your head-fake.

I often flagrantly and intentionally disregard the 3-second rule (one of the few times in basketball that intentional and flagrant go together); but not when a player has the ball in the lane. That's a completely different situation where a distinct advantage is gained unfairly.

Re: Re: Duly noted
 

It would be nice if 'they' provided some guidance. I think the advocates here have done what can be done, in its absence.

Re: Re: Duly noted
 

I'm not even sure I see the original play consuming 5 seconds, but now you've got it up to 7, and the poor SOB has acquired tuorettes, 50 headfakes in that 5 seconds (that's 2 headfakes per second for you math illiterates out there). A1 is guilty of 1, maybe 2 headfakes on his journey from the FT line to the basket.

C'mon Chuck, this aint rocket science. If A1's making progress and/or trying to get a shot off then he can stay in there forever. If he passes out & stays in call it.

Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

I could not disagree with this more. If A1 is moving to the basket or is about to attempt a try, withhold the whistle. As soon as A1 is no longer attempting a try, it's a violation (assuming that the count has exceeded 3 seconds). If you pull the ball back down for a fake, whistle. If you turn away from the basket for a spin, whistle. That's the way I was taught.

Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

Who you calling math illiterate?

Last time I checked 50 / 2 is 25. ;)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

Bridge to pettard...one to hoist.

(Or should I say that would be correct in *your* area but in *my* area we do things differently... :p )

Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

Ya know what?

I don't believe that you watch the lane that closely, hell bent on taking a 3 second violation at the slightest provocation.

I've seen you work, you don't do this.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

I think you both got it wrong...
50 headfakes in 5 seconds is 10 headfakes a second...duh!:)

BTW...might as well put in my 2 cents.

50 headfakes gets a 3 second violation whistle from me.
Maybe not on one upfake, I would have to see it, but..."forever in the key"...I don't think so.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

Bridge to <font color = red>pettard</font>...one to hoist.

[/B][/QUOTE]Tsk, tsk, tsk.....

There is no such word as "pettard".

You obviously meant "petard".

<b>Petard</b>:
- pe-tard
- derived from the French noun- <i>pet</i> or <b>"fart"</b>.
- 1) a small bell-shaped bomb used to breach a gate or wall.
2) a loud firecracker
Word History: The French used <i>petard</i>- <b>"a loud discharge of intestinal gas"</b>- for a kind of infernal engine used for blasting through the gates of a city. To be <b>"hoist by one's own petard"</b> means to blow oneself up with one's own bomb.

So.........

You either wanted to blow yourself up or fart. Which one was it?

Btw, if you put it to a vote, I would hazard a guess that door #1 would win in a landslide.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Nov 23rd, 2005 at 07:54 AM]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

You're absolutely right about that. I don't look to make 3-second calls unless I feel I have to. Most of us are like that. But I want to be clear that I disagree with the "he can make as many headfakes/jukes as he wants" philosophy. IF he's in the lane long enough that we've noticed it (which we all agree is going to be more than 3 actual seconds) and then he tries multiple dipsy-doodle moves, we should have a violation. He should not be allowed in the lane for as long as he wants simply b/c a try is coming sometime in the future. The try or move to the basket must be immediate.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

[/B][/QUOTE]

Who you calling math illiterate?

Last time I checked 50 / 2 is 25. ;) [/B][/QUOTE]

I think you both got it wrong...
50 headfakes in 5 seconds is 10 headfakes a second...duh!:)
[/B][/QUOTE]

Very good Rookiedude, you have received your bonus points for the day!! :)

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

As I recall in this play A1 started at the high post, recieved a pass & drove in after a head fake. He then picked up his dribble, headfaked again & went in for a layup.

No way, now how is this play a 3 second violation.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Duly noted
 

Depends on which of the 3 you take as the variable. I took his total and rate as inputs to come up with a time...

50 headfakes at 2 per second takes 25 seconds.

You could also take his total and time and come up with a rate...as you have done.