The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 02:59pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Champaign, IL
Posts: 5,687
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
No matter how you hold it, it's going to make the area you can swat bigger.
You seem pretty certain this is true.

Care to back it up?
Sure. Pick up a shoe. Is it exactly the same size and shape as your hand? If not, it increases the area that you can touch with that hand. Increased area = extension.
What if the player hits/swats the ball with the back of his hand, even though he's holding the shoe in that same hand, and the shoe never touches the ball or other player? Or, for that matter, bats the ball away with the other hand? Stop play, or play on?

(1/2 curiosity, 1/2 pot-stirring)
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

(Used with permission.)
Reply With Quote
  #32 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 03:24pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,105
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
I can hold a shoe in my hand in such a way that while it does not conform exactly to the size & shape of my hand this extension you speak of does not exist.
Of course it does. If it increases the surface area of your hand, it's extended. Extension is not just outward from the fingertips; it's outward, period.
__________________
Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 03:30pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
I can hold a shoe in my hand in such a way that while it does not conform exactly to the size & shape of my hand this extension you speak of does not exist.
Of course it does. If it increases the surface area of your hand, it's extended. Extension is not just outward from the fingertips; it's outward, period.
I really don't know wtf you're talking about here Chuck.

Maybe you mean to use the word "volume" instead of "area"??

If not then I admit you have sure confused the heck out of me.

Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)  
Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 03:38pm
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Houghton, U.P., Michigan
Posts: 9,953
Arrow

Quote:
Originally posted by M&M Guy
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Dan_ref
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
No matter how you hold it, it's going to make the area you can swat bigger.
You seem pretty certain this is true.

Care to back it up?
Sure. Pick up a shoe. Is it exactly the same size and shape as your hand? If not, it increases the area that you can touch with that hand. Increased area = extension.
What if the player hits/swats the ball with the back of his hand, even though he's holding the shoe in that same hand, and the shoe never touches the ball or other player? Or, for that matter, bats the ball away with the other hand? Stop play, or play on?

(1/2 curiosity, 1/2 pot-stirring)
For me, swatting at the ball with the hand that is holding a shoe is a gonna be a violation based on:
  • Safety - shoe gets away and strikes a player, shoelace in an eye.
  • Intimidation - heavy handed tactics due to increased mass like throwing an elbow

    And so I ask myself,"Self? Why are you responding to this post?"
    mick

  • Reply With Quote
      #35 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 03:51pm
    Official Forum Member
     
    Join Date: Dec 2004
    Location: Champaign, IL
    Posts: 5,687
    Quote:
    Originally posted by mick
    "Self? Why are you responding to this post?"
    mick
    When did Self respond? Or did he just delete it after posting it? And what about Naomi?

    Anyway, I would think if the officials on that game had to deal with it if the shoe had contacted (heavy-handedly? grooooooan!) another player, I would think the whistle would've blown, someone would be pointing OOB, play would be held up a little while the kid put his shoe back on, (we probably would've had yet ANOTHER pic of Huggins in the stands), and away we go. That's what separates them from us, I guess. I sat there in the chair, and did not know what to do. I wonder what I would've come up with in an actual game situation.

    Now, back to your original program, "Professors Chuck and Dan Discuss Grade School Geometry".
    __________________
    M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

    (Used with permission.)
    Reply With Quote
      #36 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 03:57pm
    Official Forum Member
     
    Join Date: Sep 2000
    Location: Just north of hell
    Posts: 9,250
    Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
    Quote:
    Originally posted by M&M Guy

    Now, back to your original program, "Professors Chuck and Dan Discuss Grade School Geometry".
    We coulda been discussing Shana Hiatt but nooooooo, the president of the Phil Helmuth fan club had to open up his yap...
    Reply With Quote
      #37 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 04:03pm
    Official Forum Member
     
    Join Date: Dec 2004
    Location: Champaign, IL
    Posts: 5,687
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Dan_ref
    Quote:
    Originally posted by M&M Guy

    Now, back to your original program, "Professors Chuck and Dan Discuss Grade School Geometry".
    We coulda been discussing Shana Hiatt but nooooooo, the president of the Phil Helmuth fan club had to open up his yap...
    Hey, I hope this doesn't mean I secretly like German porn?
    __________________
    M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department.

    (Used with permission.)
    Reply With Quote
      #38 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 04:07pm
    In Memoriam
     
    Join Date: Aug 2001
    Location: Hell
    Posts: 20,211
    Quote:
    Originally posted by ChuckElias
    [/B]
    Sure. Pick up a shoe. Is it exactly the same size and shape as your hand? [/B][/QUOTE]Nope, usually (and hopefully) it's the same size and shape as your foot.
    Reply With Quote
      #39 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 04:07pm
    Official Forum Member
     
    Join Date: Sep 2000
    Location: Just north of hell
    Posts: 9,250
    Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
    Quote:
    Originally posted by M&M Guy
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Dan_ref
    Quote:
    Originally posted by M&M Guy

    Now, back to your original program, "Professors Chuck and Dan Discuss Grade School Geometry".
    We coulda been discussing Shana Hiatt but nooooooo, the president of the Phil Helmuth fan club had to open up his yap...
    Hey, I hope this doesn't mean I secretly like German porn?
    Don't worry about it, if it turns out you do you'll get a letter from the NSA letting you know.
    Reply With Quote
      #40 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 04:18pm
    In Memoriam
     
    Join Date: Aug 2001
    Location: Hell
    Posts: 20,211
    Quote:
    Originally posted by rainmaker
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
    Quote:
    Originally posted by lookin2improve
    Easy one in NFHS. Case book play 3.5SitA tells us that one criteria to be applied is that the equipment used is supposed to be appropriate for basketball. That's why we don't let players wear gloves for instance, which are specifically mentioned as a no-no in that case play. It's also why we wouldn't let 'em wear shoes as gloves either. Use the same thinking for NCAA- if there isn't already something in their rules already resembling the FED philosophy.
    Can this be applied to situations where HS players are wearing the wristbands up on their biceps or even on their legs? Do you ignore this or address it?
    Use rule 3-5-3 for that one. It sez "Equipment shall not be modified from it's original manufactured state and shall be worn in the manner the manufacturer intended it to be worn". Iow, wristbands go on wrists, headbands go on heads, etc. We instruct our officials to call it that way too. [/B][/QUOTE]

    We were instructed in our meeting on Wednesday evening that the SWEAT bands can be worn wherever, but only one per limb. [/B][/QUOTE]That ruling makes absolutely zero sense to me. If you're gonna interpret a rule to say that wearing wristbands or sweatbands anywhere on the body is legal, then under what authority can someone then making up a new rule restricting a player to one per limb? That ruling is completely illogical imo. If a player does wear 2 on a limb and that player refuses to take one off when told to, what rule in the book are you gonna use to enforce your edict? What rule do you cite to the coach when he asks why it's legal for his player to wear one, but it's illegal for his player to wear two?

    But, it is what it is and you gotta follow it. Dumb as it is.
    Reply With Quote
      #41 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 04:19pm
    Official Forum Member
     
    Join Date: Jan 2003
    Location: In a little pink house
    Posts: 5,289
    This is an interesting dicussion

    So Mick, you're looking at it kind of like swinging elbows or striking with a fist (as far as rules that this is kind of like), that the act is potentially dangerous, even if contact isn't made (as in swinging elbows)?

    Rainmaker, I had missed that part of the rule. Thanks. That kind of deflates any objections about a shoe being legal equipment. However, the rules still specify no penalty or remedy for not wearing a shoe properly, though the jersey rule is a useful analogue, I think.

    Originally I had thought I might pass on contact with the shoe if it didn't extend the player's reach. I don't buy Chuck's "volume" justification, but I think he's probably right nonetheless. Any contact with the shoe is going to raise all kinds of red flags with a lot of people: players, coaches, fans, partners. It just isn't how basketball is supposed to be played. So we probably have to stop play if any "interesting" contact with that shoe occurs.

    But I'm not sure I agree with POI. Depends on the situation, I guess. If he uses it on defense, and the offense has possession, it makes sense to give it back to the offense, so POI works there. If he blocks a shot with it, I don't feel right going to the arrow. It feels like he's done something wrong and the ball ought to go back to the shooting team. OTOH, there is rules support for POI (in general, not in this specific case) and none for a violation. But I still think it ought to go back to the shooter. As I was once told, "If you don't know what to do, do what's fair." If you throw goaltending or BI into this situation, I think the shoe is ignored and the violation called.

    Would anybody think some kind of "preventive officiating" approach to prevent this would be advisable? Maybe as the kid with the shoe runs by ask him to give it to you? Maybe just holler "shoe," and hold your hands out, asking him to toss it to you?
    __________________
    "It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming
    Reply With Quote
      #42 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 05:15pm
    In Memoriam
     
    Join Date: Aug 2001
    Location: Hell
    Posts: 20,211
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
    If you throw goaltending or BI into this situation, I think the shoe is ignored and the violation called.

    Can't call GT if a thrown shoe hits a shot on the way up, can you?

    What is the correct call?

    Forgive me, Lord.....
    Reply With Quote
      #43 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 05:19pm
    Esteemed Participant
     
    Join Date: Oct 2000
    Location: Vancouver, WA
    Posts: 4,775
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
    If you throw goaltending or BI into this situation, I think the shoe is ignored and the violation called.

    Can't call GT if a thrown shoe hits a shot on the way up, can you?

    What is the correct call?

    Forgive me, Lord.....
    Nope...but I'm gonna have a fragrant foul and automatic ejection for having that stinky shoe off in the first place...followed closely by my unveiling of the life-size poster of Dan and Shanna Hiatt that I found online earlier today - thus distracting the coaches long enough to make a quick escape out the nearest exit...
    Reply With Quote
      #44 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 05:24pm
    Official Forum Member
     
    Join Date: Aug 2001
    Location: Western Mass.
    Posts: 9,105
    Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
    If you throw goaltending or BI into this situation, I think the shoe is ignored and the violation called.

    Can't call GT if a thrown shoe hits a shot on the way up, can you?
    In the NBA, you can. But only in the NBA.

    Quote:
    Player A1 is about to attempt a field goal when Player B1, who has lost a shoe, throws the shoe in the direction of the ball. What is the ruling if:

    (a) the ball has been released?

    Ruling: (a) Player A1 shall be awarded points consistent with the play and a technical foul shall be called on Player B1. After the free throw attempt, the ball shall be awarded to Team B as after any score.

    RULE 2- Section III
    RULE 12A - Section V-a
    No mention of on the way up or down. As long as it's released, it's BI. That's from the '02 case book, which is unfortunately the most recent book I have.
    __________________
    Any NCAA rules and interpretations in this post are relevant for men's games only!
    Reply With Quote
      #45 (permalink)  
    Old Fri Jan 20, 2006, 05:29pm
    In Memoriam
     
    Join Date: Aug 2001
    Location: Hell
    Posts: 20,211
    Quote:
    Originally posted by ChuckElias
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
    Quote:
    Originally posted by Back In The Saddle
    If you throw goaltending or BI into this situation, I think the shoe is ignored and the violation called.

    Can't call GT if a thrown shoe hits a shot on the way up, can you?
    In the NBA, you can. But only in the NBA.

    Quote:
    Player A1 is about to attempt a field goal when Player B1, who has lost a shoe, throws the shoe in the direction of the ball. What is the ruling if:

    (a) the ball has been released?

    Ruling: (a) Player A1 shall be awarded points consistent with the play and a technical foul shall be called on Player B1. After the free throw attempt, the ball shall be awarded to Team B as after any score.

    RULE 2- Section III
    RULE 12A - Section V-a
    No mention of on the way up or down. As long as it's released, it's BI. That's from the '02 case book, which is unfortunately the most recent book I have.
    If Ron Artest threw a fan and it hit the ball, would it be the same call under NBA rules?
    Reply With Quote
    Reply

    Bookmarks


    Posting Rules
    You may not post new threads
    You may not post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is On
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On



    All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:16am.



    Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1