You make the call.....

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's up to youto judge whether this was a try or a pass -- given the time left, I assume it was a try. Award three shots.

Having said that, I'd support a rule change that a "try" (or maybe just a three-point try) can only be from the front court

I don't know. Not that it happens often, but you'd be adding a new coaching strategy when up by three and the opponent has to launch a last second shot from beyond half-court. Foul the shooter; he would only get two shots.

[JugglingReferee]

I award 3 shots. And maybe possession.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

I award 3 shots. And maybe possession.

This friend speaks my mind!

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I don't know. Not that it happens often, but you'd be adding a new coaching strategy when up by three and the opponent has to launch a last second shot from beyond half-court. Foul the shooter; he would only get two shots.

If it's (redefined to be) not a try, then there's no need to foul. It would be a live ball going thorugh the basket ==> 2 points.

The three-point shot is "good" for teams that run an offense to get someone open on the outside. I don't think it was intended for "last second desperation heaves". So, I'd either make them not a try, or call it a try but it's only worth two points.

Not a big deal either way, and there have been plenty of chances to change it and no rules code (that I'm aware of) has made the change, so it's not going to happen.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The three-point shot is "good" for teams that run an offense to get someone open on the outside. I don't think it was intended for "last second desperation heaves".

Not sure I agree here.

I believe the 'intent' of the 3 pt shot was not so much to reward teams for moving their game to the perimeter as it was to thrill the fannies in the seats with these types of moments.

In any event I'm not so sure it's been good for the game, we've all been involved in games at many levels where the shooter clanks 3 off the rim before hitting his 2 or 3 for the night.

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If it's (redefined to be) not a try, then there's no need to foul. It would be a live ball going thorugh the basket ==> 2 points.

As long as it goes through before the buzzer sounds.

[SeanFitzRef]

My partner deemed this play a 'pass'. Player got two shots, if he hits both we go to overtime. The other partner and myself (three-person) wanted to bring him over to confer, but he said "pass" right away. Kid missed the first, made the second. Game over.

After the game, we discussed the play, and came to the conclussion that we should have given three shots on the play, for the sheer stupidity of the p[layer on team A for fouling in that situation!!!

[ChuckElias]

Originally Posted by SeanFitzRef

Kid missed the first, made the second. Game over.

Was there any time left on the clock when the FTs were attempted? If not, he should not have shot the 2nd FT, right?

[SeanFitzRef]

I let him shoot the second, but u're right, second was irrelevant. Summer ball.

[RonRef]

Originally Posted by SeanFitzRef

My partner deemed this play a 'pass'. Player got two shots, if he hits both we go to overtime. The other partner and myself (three-person) wanted to bring him over to confer, but he said "pass" right away. Kid missed the first, made the second. Game over.

After the game, we discussed the play, and came to the conclussion that we should have given three shots on the play, for the sheer stupidity of the p[layer on team A for fouling in that situation!!!

SeanFitzRef
You should still have gotten together and helped your partner see the error of his ways, I don't care if he said "pass" on the play. Our number one responsibility is to get the call right, sure you would have taken some major heat from the coach, but that is our job. We all have brain farts out on the court, we need be strong/good partners and help each other out when this happens.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by RonRef

SeanFitzRef
You should still have gotten together and helped your partner see the error of his ways, I don't care if he said "pass" on the play. Our number one responsibility is to get the call right, sure you would have taken some major heat from the coach, but that is our job. We all have brain farts out on the court, we need be strong/good partners and help each other out when this happens.

How do you 100% know that you were right and your partner was wrong?

Are you in the habit of questioning your partner's judgement calls?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by RonRef

SeanFitzRef
You should still have gotten together and helped your partner see the error of his ways, I don't care if he said "pass" on the play. Our number one responsibility is to get the call right, sure you would have taken some major heat from the coach, but that is our job. We all have brain farts out on the court, we need be strong/good partners and help each other out when this happens.

With all do respect that is wrong. This is a judgment call. I think this "get it right" perspective goes too far some times. Of course you have to get it right, but judgment calls are just that "A judgment call." You cannot come in and change that even if you think it is wrong. All you can do is give information and use that information to help make the call. This is why I cannot stand this "we have to get it right" point of view. Of course we have to get the play right, that is what we are there for in the first place. When you need to give more influence is when you are going to totally mess up a rule. This is not one of those situations.

Peace

[SeanFitzRef]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

With all do respect that is wrong. This is a judgment call. I think this "get it right" perspective goes too far some times. Of course you have to get it right, but judgment calls are just that "A judgment call." You cannot come in and change that even if you think it is wrong. All you can do is give information and use that information to help make the call. This is why I cannot stand this "we have to get it right" point of view. Of course we have to get the play right, that is what we are there for in the first place. When you need to give more influence is when you are going to totally mess up a rule. This is not one of those situations.

Peace

JRut,

Thanks for speaking on this. "Getting it right" refers more to rules than another person's judgement, IMO. How can one ref tell another what he\she saw was wrong if they are focusing on their own responsibilities on the court? If it is a call in the 'gray areas' on the court, that is one thing (basically free throw line area). Anywhere else on the court, it had better be an 'Oh My Goodness!!!!!!!! ' play in order for another partner to come and get it. Again, just my opinion.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I don't know. Not that it happens often, but you'd be adding a new coaching strategy when up by three and the opponent has to launch a last second shot from beyond half-court. Foul the shooter; he would only get two shots.

I would think with things the way they are today, in this situation many coaches tell their kid to heave up a prayer and hope to get fouled in the process. The shot doesn't have a chance to go in, but if you can get three free throws to make two points, your chances go up. So it would be trading one coaching strategy for the logical opposite. Pick your poison.

[hhawk]

The three-point shot is "good" for teams that run an offense to get someone open on the outside. I don't think it was intended for "last second desperation heaves". So, I'd either make them not a try, or call it a try but it's only worth two points.

I don't think that was the intent when the shot was created. I think the intent was to force defenses further out to the permiter to open up the court and help the game be more fluid. But I agree the intent was never for heaves and have thought whether 3s should only be from the front court. (I cringe everytime I hear someone suggest backcourt heaves should be 4 points...)