Woof woof T

[Back In The Saddle]

We've mentioned the "barking dog" play here a couple of times as I recall. In the most recent issue of Referee magazine they list a case play in support of a new editorial change:

Unsporting fouls (4-19-14). Clarifies that an unsporting foul can be a noncontact technical foul that involves behavior not in accordance with the spirit of fair play. The rule clarification provides further inclusion for playing action that is unfair, unethical or disonorable.

First of all my understanding all along was that conduct that is unfair, unethical or dishonorable was unsporting. So I'm not sure what it is they're trying to clarify. Maybe I'm just dense.

However, the case play was interesting:

Late in the game, A2 is inbounding the ball on the endline in his or her own frontcourt. In an effort to deceive the other team, A4 lines up near the sideline on his or her hands and knees and begins to simulate a barkng dog. As the team B players turn to look at A4, A2 throws the ball to A5 who makes an uncontested layup. Ruling The official shall stop play, wave off team A's basket and issue an unsporting technical foul to A4. Team B will shoot two free throws and have the ball for a designated-spot throw-in at the division line opposite the table.

Obviously Referee is not an official source of interpretations. So, I put it to you, and I leave it to you (you gotta love Alfred P. Doolittle): Would you call a T for the barking dog play?

[deecee]

maybe on the team that fell for it -- since when did we become the attention police

[zebraman]

I'm quite certain that I would be laughing too hard to assess a T.

Z

[M&M Guy]

It seems to me I remember this clarification coming out right after this play was shown on TV (and the internet). I think their clarification was the fact that to most people, someone on their hands and knees barking like a dog is not unsporting in and of itself, unless of course, that player turns around and bites an opponent in the ankle. (Sorry, Chuck, I know I've left the door wide open for comments...), But within the context of the game of basketball, they consider that not a part of the "real" game, so they wanted that considered unsporting. If you let that go, someone, somewhere will come up with another crazy stunt, like hanging from the rafters with a rope and pulley. They just wanted to nip those kinds of stunts in the bud. Nip it, I say.

That said, the first time I saw it I thought it was a great play.

[Jurassic Referee]

Sounds like one for Chuck to get the NFHS to comment on. I know that certain types of deliberately misleading plays designed to gain an advantage are covered in the FED football rules. As it stands right now, it's strictly a judgement call in basketball, Referee magazine notwithstanding.

As BITS said, please take anything concerning the rules issued by Referee with a grain of salt. They aren't an official source and have made numerous rules mistakes in the past. You got a heckuva lot better chance of getting a correct answer to any question on this forum compared to Referee magazine.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

... unless of course, that player turns around and bites an opponent in the ankle. (Sorry, Chuck, I know I've left the door wide open for comments...),

Now you know why Chuck became a referee....

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Now you know why Chuck became a referee....

That is the funniest pic in 6 years I have been here!


(Sorry Chuck)

[canuckrefguy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Now you know why Chuck became a referee....

Oh man - that's cold.



Now to comment - I agree with M&M - they likely wanted to prevent a stream of "stunt" plays in response to the massive international exposure of the "barking dog". I laughed my a** off the first time I saw it - but then thought about it - at what point is one team making a mockery of the game and harming the integrity of the game. A large part of me agrees with DeeCee who says "we're not the attention police". But if the barking dog isn't enough, what is? A player who goes into Jim Carrey mode, throws a spastic fit as a distraction. Or maybe a player fakes collapsing on the floor to draw attention. What about a player who, during a throw-in, whips off his (or her) uniform and stands there naked as a distraction. Is that enough for a T?

Having said all that - when's the last time anyone actually had a stunt like this. Probably never.

[TADW_Elessar]

Originally Posted by deecee

maybe on the team that fell for it -- since when did we become the attention police

Well, this would an obvious T:

On a fast break, A4 beats his only guard B5 and goes for the layup. B5 shouts in the hope that A4 would frighten or distract anyway and miss the shot.

The "barking dog" stuff doesn't seem that much different to me...

whips off his (or her) uniform and stands there naked as a distraction. Is that enough for a T?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TADW_Elessar

Well, this would an obvious T:

On a fast break, A4 beats his only guard B5 and goes for the layup. B5 shouts in the hope that A4 would frighten or distract anyway and miss the shot.

Maybe a "T" under FIBA rules......but....legal under NFHS and NCAA rules unless the shout was profane or trash-talking. If so, delayed "T" until the shot attempt was over.

[TADW_Elessar]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Maybe a "T" under FIBA rules......but....legal under NFHS and NCAA rules unless the shout was profane or trash-talking. If so, delayed "T" until the shot attempt was over.

You're too weird on the other side of the ocean...

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

If you let that go, someone, somewhere will come up with another crazy stunt, like hanging from the rafters with a rope and pulley. They just wanted to nip those kinds of stunts in the bud. Nip it, I say.

Is this where the more athletic screeching monkeys go to do their....ah, never mind.

I'm surprised no one brought up the start-the-second-half-throw-in-by-lining-up-on-the-wrong-side-of-the-court-for-an-easy-layup-play.

Think this is covered in the editorial change?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

Is this where the more athletic screeching monkeys go to do their....ah, never mind.

I'm surprised no one brought up the start-the-second-half-throw-in-by-lining-up-on-the-wrong-side-of-the-court-for-an-easy-layup-play.

Think this is covered in the editorial change?

Hmm...good question. My guess is probably not, because that is still a "game of basketball" play, even though it involves deception. I don't think the committee is against deception, per se, but against things that are outside and not really part of the game. If they were against deception, they would outlaw the pump-fake, wouldn't you think?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by TADW_Elessar

Well, this would an obvious T:

On a fast break, A4 beats his only guard B5 and goes for the layup. B5 shouts in the hope that A4 would frighten or distract anyway and miss the shot.

The "barking dog" stuff doesn't seem that much different to me...

hmmmm -- you guys know that basektball isnt golf and complete silence isnt needed? Like JR said unless the yell is profane and its just a loud "SHOT" or "MISS" then if the player misses its his own damn fault for not having any concentration.

I mean if a player can go up against heavy pressure and get fouled and make a tough strong finish how is a yell gonna scare him off. If it does maybe he should be thinkging about how he is going to approach his tee the following moring.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Hmm...good question. My guess is probably not, because that is still a "game of basketball" play, even though it involves deception. I don't think the committee is against deception, per se, but against things that are outside and not really part of the game. If they were against deception, they would outlaw the pump-fake, wouldn't you think?

I'm not sure exactly how I feel about this play, but the deception involved in the wrong-end-of-the-court play is of a different kind, or flavor or degree than a pump fake.

The pump fake is entirely within the spirit of the game, it's offense versus defense and the offense gains an advantage through more clever play. The wrong-end-of-the-court play doesn't pit the offense and defense head-to-head with equal opportunity, it simply uses the confusion that often surrounds an otherwise meaningless artifact of the game (i.e., changing baskets after the half) to potentially earn an uncontested basket. You can argue that the defense is at fault for not being aware, but the two situations just feel different. One is a triumph of clever play and skill over a defender with an equal opportunity, the other is too-clever-by-half manipulation and deception.