Dunking in warmups

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

This did happen just 2-3 years ago in the Portland area.

Details?

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Details?

I don't recall the details but I think it was a Boys JV or Freshman game at Lake Oswego or Lakeridge (or one of the schools in that area). Three different players either dunked or hung on the rim in pregame and got the coach tossed.

[refnrev]

Originally posted by Ref Daddy

Is that correct? Three incidents and your out? Rule book reference please.

__________________________________________________ ______

Ref Daddy,
The rules reference was posted above, but also check out the technical foul page in the rule book that shows what, how, and to whom. A really helpful page to get to know very well. RR

[wwcfoa43]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

The problem is that there's absolutely no rules basis to support that particular hypothesis. What's your answer gonna be if someone asks you for a rules reference to back up your statement?

The rim vibrating might not be a bad rule of thumb to use, but I don't think that it's a good idea to tell a coach anything that can't be backed up by some rules language. Just tell the coach that it either was or wasn't a dunk.

I think the rim vibrating is a pretty good interpretation of the rule. The rule states "Dunking or stuffing is the driving, forcing, pushing or attempting to force..." So if you place the ball above the hoop and allow gravity to do the work then you are not creating the "force". Now you could force the ball through without causing the ring to move but then it is difficult to tell if the force was caused by you or by simple gravity. If the ring moves then this provides some good evidence of the force since the ball and gravity alone (from a short distance) will not likely cause the ring to move.

Conclusion: (a) Ring does not move = benefit of doubt given to player that they provided no force.

(b) Ring moves = little doubt that player provided force.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by wwcfoa43

I think the rim vibrating is a pretty good interpretation of the rule. The rule states "Dunking or stuffing is the driving, forcing, pushing or attempting to force..." So if you place the ball above the hoop and allow gravity to do the work then you are not creating the "force". Now you could force the ball through without causing the ring to move but then it is difficult to tell if the force was caused by you or by simple gravity. If the ring moves then this provides some good evidence of the force since the ball and gravity alone (from a short distance) will not likely cause the ring to move.

Conclusion: (a) Ring does not move = benefit of doubt given to player that they provided no force.

(b) Ring moves = little doubt that player provided force.

Problem = You have absolutely no rules language to back that little fantasy up.

Why do people take a simple rule and make up their own interpretation for it?

The "rim vibrating" is not mentioned anywhere in the rules as being a criteria or a possible criteria of a dunk. It's that simple. Are you telling me that if you simply drop the ball from above and it hits the ring first and then slops in or drops out, you're still gonna call that play a dunk because the ring moved? If a player takes a jump shot and rattles the ring, is that a "T" too?

Call it any way you want. Have fun trying to explain it later though if someone questions you. You won't find any rules language to support your hypothesis.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Dec 31st, 2005 at 08:30 AM]

[Nevadaref]

Wouldn't it be better to just use the wording of the definition instead of designing these other criteria to follow?

It seems that officials have way to many "I use such and such to decide if..." when the clear language of the rules would do just fine.