Interesting Scenario

[coach41]

Hi all,

Here's an interesting scenario that occured about 3 years ago in a local boys CYO playoff game I was working (either 6th or 7th grade):

Team A is down 1
Team A is out of timeouts
Team A fouls Team B with between 1 or 2 seconds left.
Team B is in the Bonus - I believe they were in the double bonus

Team B makes 1st free throw.

Team A then does something interesting. Because they were out of timeouts, the coach had his players "violate" the lane intentionally in case the second free throw was missed. Well, the poor kid from Team B wasn't trying to miss but he did. Alas, he got plenty more of opportunities thanks to Team A's "violations". The kid finally did sink one (after what seemed like an eternity).

Team A tried a long distance pass for a last second shot but they couldn't get it off and the game ended.


The coach from Team A mentioned that this was something he saw that a local high school coach employed.

Any thoughts? I don't think it's "illegal" in the book, but definitely an unusual situation.

[jeffpea]

After the 2nd or 3rd violation (or at least when I determine that the violations are purposely design to achieve the outcome you describe), I tell the coach and the players that the next violation will be a T. This falls under the "making a travesty/mockery of the game" category in my book (of course that's not the rule book term, just my term). The official certainly has the ability to rule on points not covered in the rule book - this would be one of them.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by coach41

Hi all,

Here's an interesting scenario that occured about 3 years ago in a local boys CYO playoff game I was working (either 6th or 7th grade):

Team A is down 1
Team A is out of timeouts
Team A fouls Team B with between 1 or 2 seconds left.
Team B is in the Bonus - I believe they were in the double bonus

Team B makes 1st free throw.

Team A then does something interesting. Because they were out of timeouts, the coach had his players "violate" the lane intentionally in case the second free throw was missed. Well, the poor kid from Team B wasn't trying to miss but he did. Alas, he got plenty more of opportunities thanks to Team A's "violations". The kid finally did sink one (after what seemed like an eternity).

Team A tried a long distance pass for a last second shot but they couldn't get it off and the game ended.


The coach from Team A mentioned that this was something he saw that a local high school coach employed.

Any thoughts? I don't think it's "illegal" in the book, but definitely an unusual situation.

It's a T'able offense, making a travesty of the game & all that.

Tell them to stop, if they don't then assess the T & clear the lane for B's FTs.

[Texas Aggie]

I don't understand the strategy. You could call it disconcertion or just an opposing team lane violation, but you continue to give the shooter more opportunities to shoot. How exactly does that help the violating team?

[cmathews]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

I don't understand the strategy. You could call it disconcertion or just an opposing team lane violation, but you continue to give the shooter more opportunities to shoot. How exactly does that help the violating team?

it gives them an opportunity to advance the ball via a long pass with the clock stopped.

[ChuckElias]

For the 1,342nd time, making a travesty of the game is not grounds for issuing a technical foul. The penalty for such actions is a forfeit of the game (FED 5-4-1).

There is also no provision for issuing a T for repeated violations of the FT rules. You may be thinking of 10-3-6d, but that only addresses repeated violations of the throw-in rules.

You could issue a T if you simply consider the violations unsportsmanlike. But they don't seem unsportsmanlike to me; they seem strategic. I'd be tempted to tell the coach to play ball; if they don't want to play, then we'll just end the game.

I don't think I'd be able to do it in a real game tho, as much as I'd like to. I'd probably go with the T. It's easier to explain and accomplishes the same thing.

[tmp44]

In all honesty, guys, if the coach is using this as a strategic ploy, which it certainly looks like he is, then what is the difference between this and fouling at the end of the game? If you think about it, the purpose is the same: keep the clock stopped. We don't give Ts or forfeit games for a coach having his players commit 22 fouls in the last 2 minutes of the game, why should we give one here? Is the coach being a pain in the a$$? Yes, but it doesn't seem like we should punish him for employing, at least what it seems to me, a pretty smart strategic move. Just my $.02.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by ChuckElias

For the 1,342nd time, making a travesty of the game is not grounds for issuing a technical foul. The penalty for such actions is a forfeit of the game (FED 5-4-1).

There is also no provision for issuing a T for repeated violations of the FT rules. You may be thinking of 10-3-6d, but that only addresses repeated violations of the throw-in rules.

You could issue a T if you simply consider the violations unsportsmanlike. But they don't seem unsportsmanlike to me; they seem strategic. I'd be tempted to tell the coach to play ball; if they don't want to play, then we'll just end the game.

I don't think I'd be able to do it in a real game tho, as much as I'd like to. I'd probably go with the T. It's easier to explain and accomplishes the same thing.

So....you come out guns ablazin' about how wrong a T is in this case only to talk yourself into agreeing with us?

[JRutledge]

If the same result is a T does it matter what the conclusion you came to on why you gave the T?

Peace

[Snake~eyes]

A T is not acceptable in this case. This is not a travesty of the game, the coach is not doing it to prolong the game, be a jerk ect ect. He is trying a LEGITIMATE strategy to try and get a throw-in with the clock stopped. Now you're going to give him a technical foul? That's ridiculous if you ask me.

[JRutledge]

Snake,

Unless you are on the game or the assignor, it really does not matter what you think or if a T is justified. The same would go for my opinion on this issue as it relates to your point of view. I do not think this is a legitimate strategy at all. I am going to give the coach some heads up, but a T might be in order because he is doing something to that is outside of the game and trying to use a loophole in a rule to get and advantage from that. I do not see that as a very sportsmanlike act. That is just my opinion on this issue.

Peace

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

So....you come out guns ablazin' about how wrong a T is in this case

No, the guns blazing were for people who continue to advocate a T for making a travesty of the game. If the game is a travesty, that means it's not going to continue. If it's bad enough to call it a travesty, you just end it.

In this case, however, I said that if you feel it needs to be penalized, the T is probably the better option, although I personally don't think it's particularly unsportsmanlike.

[deecee]

why is this T worthy?

on a miss team A has virtually 0% chance of tying or winning -- on a make they have probably a 10-20% chance to tie with a long pass and quick shot. JMO

why not T up a team when they foul at the end of the game because that is giving a team that is down an advantage to stop the clock and possibly come back. JMO

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by deecee

why is this T worthy?

on a miss team A has virtually 0% chance of tying or winning -- on a make they have probably a 10-20% chance to tie with a long pass and quick shot. JMO

why not T up a team when they foul at the end of the game because that is giving a team that is down an advantage to stop the clock and possibly come back. JMO

Why is anything T worthy? Do we not use our own opinions to what we feel crosses a line or does not cross a line?

Peace

[wanja]

A T seems like a sensible, practical response if there are multiple misses of the free thorw (e.g. in the worst case the opposing coach instructs his player to intentionally miss).