Two Questions

[coachmjw]

I am a coach who comes to this site to get the expert answers in regard to the officiating of a ball game. I had two situations happen last night and I want to know if they were handled correctly.

1. In the third quarter we received a warning for breaking the plane as we were pressing the opponent and putting pressure on the inbounder. Later in the game with less than a minute left of playing time - we scored on a lay up and the ball bouned off someone under the basket. As the ball rolled out toward the free throw line our player tapped it back toward the take out man. A technical was called because we made contact with the ball and we had already been warned. My argument was our player was simply helping the opponent and no intent of delaying the game was made. The ball was rolling UP the court. The ref said we had been warned earlier and they Had to call a techinal, even though it didn't cause a delay.

Sounds wrong to me - comments?

2. We are pressing after a made basket. The ball is inbounded by a baseball pass motion. We tip it back out of bounds about 10 feet to the left of the inbounder. On the next inbound the inbounder runs the baseline. I argued that he could not run the baseline. The ball already had crossed the plane and was knocked out of bounds at a different place. The ref said it was a continuation of the previous play and he could run the baseline. Is this correct? Comments.

[JugglingReferee]

1. It sounds like the T was not warranted. But I was not there to see the play.

2. Endline provisions were lost. It should have been a spot throw-in.

[Adam]

1. By rule, these are two separate issues that bring two separate warnings prior to technical fouls. Your players would have earned a T by crossing the plane again, but touching the ball after a made basket would be its own warning followed by a T the next time.

2. The Juggler is right.

What level is this?

[rainmaker]

1. Yea, the rule is that these two "acts" take separate warnings, and so it should have been a warning, if it was interference, not a T. I know a fair number of refs think the rule is that the scoring team isn't allowed to even touch the ball, but the wording is not that strict. If your player was just helping out, it should be legal. However, to prevent these problems in the future, you should probably instruct your players to not touch it at all.

2. Ref got this one wrong, too.

Having said all that, I hope you didn't point out to the ref how wrong he was, or how lousy he was. I doesn't sound like you're that kind of person, but I just want to put in one word in defense of the ref.

[Ref Daddy]

1) Sounds like your officials were calling delay of game and felt the reaching over earlier was the warning, but like others here it does sound a bit of a tough call.

Could be a lot of factors. Did you ask them politely?

2) Sounds like an error 2 me.

[tjones1]

Originally posted by Snaqwells
What level is this?

I'm afraid the answer is going to be varsity.

[coachmjw]

Yes. This was a high school varsity boys game. So I am safe to say that in the first situation the delay/interference is seperate situations and no technical should have been called. Is this correct? Is there a rule number to back this up?

I knew the second situation was wrong.

[tjones1]

That is correct. Throw-in references: 9-2-11 and 10-1-10

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by coachmjw
Yes. This was a high school varsity boys game. So I am safe to say that in the first situation the delay/interference is seperate situations and no technical should have been called. Is this correct? Is there a rule number to back this up?

I knew the second situation was wrong.

Unfortunately, the officials were incorrect in both of your situations. The first one is not well understood so it is forgivable. The second one is in black and white in the book and should not be screwed up on the court.

Here are some rule references for you:

1.)There are three different team warnings for delay listed in the rule.

4-47 WARNING FOR DELAY
A warning to a team for delay is an administrative procedure by an official which is recorded in the scorebook by the scorer and reported to the coach:
ART. 1 . . . For throw-in plane violations, as in 9-2-11.
ART. 2 . . . For huddle by either team and contact with the free thrower, as in 10-1-5c.
ART. 3 . . . For interfering with the ball following a goal as in 10-1-5d.

Although most people don't correctly understand this a team could receive a separate warning for each of these three items and still NOT receive a technical foul. The team must infringe one of these specified items a second time in order to earn a T.
The language of the following case book plays supports this understanding. However, it is not crystal clear and sadly many officials misunderstand this. The NFHS needs to release a play ruling to really clarify this.


10.1.5 SITUATION C: The calling official has reported the foul and proceeds to his/her proper position for the first of two free throws awarded to A1. B1 and B2 are: (a) huddling in the lane; or (b) two B players are not occupying the first two marked spaces next to the end line as required. RULING: In (a), if the huddle delays the officials' administration, Team B is warned. The warning is recorded by the scorer and reported to the head coach. If Team B had been previously warned for free-throw delay, a technical foul shall be charged. In (b), Team B will be directed to occupy the required spaces. If there is delay, a technical foul shall be charged to Team B. (4-47)

10.1.5 SITUATION D: Immediately following a goal by A1, A3 slaps the ball away so that Team B is unable to make a quick throw-in. RULING: The official shall sound his/her whistle and go to the table to have the scorer record a team warning for this specific delay. The warning shall then be reported to the head coach of Team A. Any subsequent similar delay by Team A shall result in a technical foul charged to Team A. (4-47-3)



2.) From page 55 of the Case Book
7.5.7 SITUATION B: Team A scores a field goal. B1 picks up the ball after the made basket, then proceeds out of bounds to start the throw-in process. B1 runs along the end line out of bounds while attempting to find an open teammate for the throw-in. Immediately after B1 releases the throw-in pass, (a) the ball is kicked by A2 near the end line; (b) the ball is kicked by A2 near the division line; or (c) the ball is deflected out of bounds across the end line off of A2. RULING: In (a) and (b), A2 has violated by kicking the ball. In (a), Team B will be awarded a throw-in and retain the right to run the end line on the ensuing throw-in. In (b), Team B will put the ball in play at a designated spot nearest the violation, which is the division line. In (c), A2 legally contacted the ball and subsequently hit it out of bounds, ending the throw-in. Team B is awarded a designated spot throw-in on the end line.

[Edited by Nevadaref on Jan 22nd, 2006 at 11:45 PM]

[assignmentmaker]

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Unfortunately, the officials were incorrect in both of your situations. The first one is not well understood so it is forgivable. The second one is in black and white in the book and should not be screwed up on the court.

Here are some rule references for you:

1.)There are three different team warnings for delay listed in the rule.

4-47 WARNING FOR DELAY
A warning to a team for delay is an administrative procedure by an official which is recorded in the scorebook by the scorer and reported to the coach:
ART. 1 . . . For throw-in plane violations, as in 9-2-11.
ART. 2 . . . For huddle by either team and contact with the free thrower, as in 10-1-5c.
ART. 3 . . . For interfering with the ball following a goal as in 10-1-5d.

Although most people don't correctly understand this a team could receive a separate warning for each of these three items and still NOT receive a technical foul. The team must infringe one of these specified items a second time in order to earn a T.
The language of the following case book plays supports this understanding. However, it is not crystal clear and sadly many officials misunderstand this. The NFHS needs to release a play ruling to really clarify this.


10.1.5 SITUATION C: The calling official has reported the foul and proceeds to his/her proper position for the first of two free throws awarded to A1. B1 and B2 are: (a) huddling in the lane; or (b) two B players are not occupying the first two marked spaces next to the end line as required. RULING: In (a), if the huddle delays the officials' administration, Team B is warned. The warning is recorded by the scorer and reported to the head coach. If Team B had been previously warned for free-throw delay, a technical foul shall be charged. In (b), Team B will be directed to occupy the required spaces. If there is delay, a technical foul shall be charged to Team B. (4-47)

10.1.5 SITUATION D: Immediately following a goal by A1, A3 slaps the ball away so that Team B is unable to make a quick throw-in. RULING: The official shall sound his/her whistle and go to the table to have the scorer record a team warning for this specific delay. The warning shall then be reported to the head coach of Team A. Any subsequent similar delay by Team A shall result in a technical foul charged to Team A. (4-47-3)



2.) From page 55 of the Case Book
7.5.7 SITUATION B: Team A scores a field goal. B1 picks up the ball after the made basket, then proceeds out of bounds to start the throw-in process. B1 runs along the end line out of bounds while attempting to find an open teammate for the throw-in. Immediately after B1 releases the throw-in pass, (a) the ball is kicked by A2 near the end line; (b) the ball is kicked by A2 near the division line; or (c) the ball is deflected out of bounds across the end line off of A2. RULING: In (a) and (b), A2 has violated by kicking the ball. In (a), Team B will be awarded a throw-in and retain the right to run the end line on the ensuing throw-in. In (b), Team B will put the ball in play at a designated spot nearest the violation, which is the division line. In (c), A2 legally contacted the ball and subsequently hit it out of bounds, ending the throw-in. Team B is awarded a designated spot throw-in on the end line.

[Edited by Nevadaref on Jan 22nd, 2006 at 11:45 PM]

Like I said, I'll vote for you. We don't so much need a bevy of clarifications, though, as to have the "rules" re-written, an ultimate editorial makeover. Half as long, twice as clear. The map is not the territory.

Sure, we're stuck with some bad torts, but this situation is actually fixable. It will make some people less important, if the rules are easier to understand and remember, but . . . c'est la guerre.

What kind of law do you do?

[Dan_ref]

Geeze, we have 2 lawyers conspiring to rewrite a set of sports rules to make them less complicated.


Whereas the party of the first part, having established and obtained said pivot foot as defined above for the express purpose of this rule but distinct and seperate from the any other definitions, classes, subsets or rules groupings either stated or implied herein of "pivot" related to a body part or parts or any other body appendage acting in accordance with certain rules related to travelling shall not be lifted in a manner that causes said foot to no longer remain in contact with the floor before said player begins, intitiates or commences his/her dribble.

What was it Shakespeare said we should do first again?

[assignmentmaker]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Geeze, we have 2 lawyers conspiring to rewrite a set of sports rules to make them less complicated.


Whereas the party of the first part, having established and obtained said pivot foot as defined above for the express purpose of this rule but distinct and seperate from the any other definitions, classes, subsets or rules groupings either stated or implied herein of "pivot" related to a body part or parts or any other body appendage acting in accordance with certain rules related to travelling shall not be lifted in a manner that causes said foot to no longer remain in contact with the floor before said player begins, intitiates or commences his/her dribble.

What was it Shakespeare said we should do first again?

But remember, he also said: "Exit, pursued by a bear."

[rockyroad]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Geeze, we have 2 lawyers conspiring to rewrite a set of sports rules to make them less complicated.


Whereas the party of the first part, having established and obtained said pivot foot as defined above for the express purpose of this rule but distinct and seperate from the any other definitions, classes, subsets or rules groupings either stated or implied herein of "pivot" related to a body part or parts or any other body appendage acting in accordance with certain rules related to travelling shall not be lifted in a manner that causes said foot to no longer remain in contact with the floor before said player begins, intitiates or commences his/her dribble.

What was it Shakespeare said we should do first again?

Thanks Dan - gotta go find that rag to wipe the coffee off my screen again...sometimes I really dislike you.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by assignmentmaker

But remember, he also said: "Exit, pursued by a bear."

Luckily, there's little chance that your Shakespearean wish will come true.

Sadly, little chance that mine will either.

[Edited by Dan_ref on Jan 23rd, 2006 at 01:16 PM]

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by rockyroad
Thanks Dan - gotta go find that rag to wipe the coffee off my screen again...sometimes I really dislike you.

"Sometimes"?