Spectator interference at a critical point

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Actually, I read this to say that if the spectator interference creates a clear advantage for one team, you can make an assumption and issue the T. AR 15 says nothing about knowing who the spectator was supporting, and his action was in direct (even if unintentional) support of one team over another.

AR 14 that was also posted by Dan and that clarifies it a bit better imo. That one refers to penalizing a team's supporters. The NFHS rulesmakers also used pretty specific language in casebook play 2.8.1 too. That case play also refers to penalizing a team's followers or supporters. Any doubt, you don't penalize. The quote from that case play is "While the authority is there , the official must rarely use it, because experience has demonstrated that calling hasty technical fouls on the crowd rarely solves the problem and may, in fact, result in penalizing the wrong team because the official may not have proper knowledge as to which team's supporters were responsible for the unsporting act".

Iow, no assumptions in either NCAA or FED games. Gotta know for sure.

[Official99]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

AR 14 that was also posted by Dan and that clarifies it a bit better imo. That one refers to penalizing a team's supporters. The NFHS rulesmakers also used pretty specific language in casebook play 2.8.1 too. That case play also refers to penalizing a team's followers or supporters. Any doubt, you don't penalize. The quote from that case play is "While the authority is there , the official must rarely use it, because experience has demonstrated that calling hasty technical fouls on the crowd rarely solves the problem and may, in fact, result in penalizing the wrong team because the official may not have proper knowledge as to which team's supporters were responsible for the unsporting act".

Iow, no assumptions in either NCAA or FED games. Gotta know for sure.

Which brings us right back to the question we started with..... WHAT DO WE DO?

[TADW_Elessar]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

I had a game (yes, intramural league, but there were probably 75 spectators there because it was late in the playoffs) where a shot went up just before the buzzer. The shot, had it been good, would have changed the outcome of the game. A spectator sitting near the front row at that end of the gym threw a basketball that he had been holding onto the court, toward the basket, and it contacted the game ball headed for the basket. It was entirely possible, based on the way the shot looked, that it could have gone in the basket.

The spectator was not there for any specific team - he was looking to get out on the court after the game. It was not intended to interfere with the shot (I know the kid pretty well - he admitted this afterwards, and I believe him). Obviously he was disciplined.

Extra information aside, how would you deal with this kind of interference which clearly could have affected the outcome of a game? It's possible (however unlikely) that something similar could happen in a real game - we all know anything and everything eventually does happen. What do you do? I honestly don't think there is a solution (short of a lynch mob for the spectator - haha j/k) that would make anyone happy, even if there is a solution. But I am curious to see how people would respond to this from an officials' point of view.

From a FIBA point of view the situation is quite simple.

We simply do nothing, since we can't call anything like a technical foul on a spectator. The match ends and we report whatever happened to the federation judge, who would most likely declare the team which had the shot diverted winner (0-20) and fine the opponents, for they had not prevented their spectators from interfering with the game.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by drinkeii

I had a game (yes, intramural league, but there were probably 75 spectators there because it was late in the playoffs) where a shot went up just before the buzzer. The shot, had it been good, would have changed the outcome of the game. A spectator sitting near the front row at that end of the gym threw a basketball that he had been holding onto the court, toward the basket, and it contacted the game ball headed for the basket. It was entirely possible, based on the way the shot looked, that it could have gone in the basket.

The spectator was not there for any specific team - he was looking to get out on the court after the game. It was not intended to interfere with the shot (I know the kid pretty well - he admitted this afterwards, and I believe him). Obviously he was disciplined.

I have no rule basis to back up my answer, but based on this thread, it appears there is no definitive ruling to follow for this particular situation.

So that being said (assuming neutral court and/or no fan affiliation), I think I would treat it the same as an inadvertant whistle. In this case, there being no team control, I would go with the AP arrow. Of course now we would have to establish how much, if any, time was on the clock at the time of the interference. If there was no time on the clock, then the shooting team would just be screwed. As far as I can see, there is really no fair and equitable solution to the scenario.

Maybe this needs to be submitted to Chuck for his caseplay project?