The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 23, 2006, 10:16pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Wherever the Army sends me this year
Posts: 267
Is it basket interference if a tall player attempts to block a shot and on the follow through contacts the backboard hard enough to rattle the rim and clearly alter the shot? In this case it is a clear attempt to block the shot. It is in no way intentional so it is not a technical foul. The player in this case was 6'8" and has a long reach. At our association meeting most officials agreed that the rule reference for this call is Rule 4, Section 6, Article 5 that says "Basket interference occurs when a player pulls down a movable ring so that it contacts the ball before the ring returns to its original position". They interereted it as this action causes the rim to vibrate which is the same thing as moving the rim. I do not see how this rule applies here. I can see how this could be BI since the slap of the backboard clearly altered the shot but I am having trouble backing it up with the rule book. Can anyone provide any information on this?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 23, 2006, 10:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,789
NO this is NOT basket interference. It is also not a technical foul if you decided that this was a legitimate attempt to block the shot.

The rule that you cited about BI does NOT apply. A player has to physically pull on the ring or net for that rule to apply.

Those other officials are totally incorrect.

Keep up the good work.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 24, 2006, 01:48am
In Memoriam
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Hell
Posts: 20,213
Quote:
Originally posted by Nevadaref
NO this is NOT basket interference. It is also not a technical foul if you decided that this was a legitimate attempt to block the shot.

The rule that you cited about BI does NOT apply. A player has to physically pull on the ring or net for that rule to apply.

Those other officials are totally incorrect.

Agree, of course. Case book play 10.3.5 is the rules citation.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Jan 24, 2006, 02:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,789
Is pulling on the net BI?

CONTACTING THE BACKBOARD
10.3.5 SITUATION: A1 tries for a goal, and (a) B1 jumps and attempts to block the shot but instead slaps or strikes the backboard and the ball goes into the basket; or (b) B1 vibrates the ring as a result of pulling on the net and the ball does not enter the basket. RULING: In (a) legal and the basket counts; and (b) a technical foul is charged to B1 and there is no basket. COMMENT: The purpose of the rule is to penalize intentional contact with the backboard while a shot or try is involved or placing a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage. A player who strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-7.


Hmmmmmmm....perhaps I have stumbled upon another rule that the NFHS needs to clarify.

I only have rule books and case books back to the 2001-02 season, so I'm going to need some research help on this one. The above case book play appears in the 2001-02 Case book exactly as it does in the current 2005-06 one. The wording has not changed at all although the play used to be numbered 10.3.6 and the rule reference at the end used to be 10-3-8. Can anyone find what year this case book play first appeared?

Why is that important? Because an article was added to the basket interference rule in the 2003-04 season. That change gave us 4-6-4 "Pulls down a movable ring so that it contacts the ball before the ring returns to its original position."

Therefore, we know that the NFHS did not modify this case book play as a result of the new addition to the BI definition.

What can we conclude from that?

Did the NFHS simply slip up and fail to alter what I put in red above or is the NFHS telling us that the player must pull on the RING itself and make it move down for BI to be called and causing the ring to be pulled down by grasping the NET and pulling down does not meet this new article and consequently may only be a technical foul?

Stated more clearly, is it BI if a player pulls down a movable ring by pulling on THE NET, not the ring itself, and then after the player lets go the ball contacts the ring before it returns to its original position?

I certainly don't know the answer, but it seems that I may have to rescind part of what I wrote in my first post. I wrote, "physically pull on the ring or net," but now am not sure that the "or net" part is correct.

The only NFHS interp issued back in 2003-04 on the new BI article is the following, which doesn't mention pulling on the net only the ring itself.

2003-04 NFHS BASKETBALL RULES INTERPRETATIONS
Posted: 11/07/03
SITUATION 15: Defender B4 attempts to stop an apparent lob pass near the basket. While B4 is airborne, A3 moves beneath B4. To avoid injury, B4 grasps the basket ring. While B4 grasps the ring, A1 shoots from about 12 feet away. Just after A1 releases the shot, B4 lets go of the ring and lands safely. The ring is still moving when (a) the ball hits the moving ring and bounces in; or (b) the ball enters and passes completely through the basket, without contacting the moving ring. RULING: Since B4 grasped the ring to prevent injury, no technical foul is called. In (a), when the ball contacts the moving ring, basket interference is called on B4; the ball is dead and the try cannot score, but A1 is awarded two points. In (b), since the ball entered and passed completely through the basket without touching the ring, basket interference has not occurred; play continues. (9-11-4; 4-6-4; 10-3-5 Exc)

The only case book play also doesn't involve grasping the net.

9.11.4 SITUATION: Defender B4 attempts to stop an apparent lob pass. While B4 is airborne, A3 moves beneath B4. To avoid injury, B4 grasps the basket ring. While B4 grasps the ring, A1 shoots from about 12 feet away. Just after A1 releases the shot, B4 lets go of the ring and lands safely. The ring is still moving when (a) the ball hits the moving ring and bounces out; (b) the ball, despite the moving ring, enters and passes completely through the basket; or (c) the ring stops vibrating (returns to its normal position) and the ball bounces off the ring. RULING: Since B4 grasped the ring to prevent injury, no technical foul is called. However, the basket interference rule applies. In (a), basket interference is called on B4 because the ball struck a still-vibrating ring. Award A1 two points. In (b), since the ball entered and passed completely through the basket, basket interference is not called. Play continues. In (c), because the ring returned to its original position before the ball struck the ring, basket interference is not called. Play continues. (4-6-4; 10-3-5 Exception)


Therefore, I think the NFHS needs to provide a ruling on this.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

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 11:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1