The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Resumption of play (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/28772-resumption-play.html)

Mendy Trent Tue Oct 10, 2006 08:51am

Resumption of play
 
I don't get it. What is so different about resumption of play? So following a time-out or intermission, if a team isn't ready you put the ball down and start counting. If they aren't there after 5 seconds, you call a violation. Then you do the same for the other team. After that, it's a T.

So isn't that would you would do in a situation that WASN'T after a T.O. or intermission? What makes resumption of play special?

Rick Durkee Tue Oct 10, 2006 09:25am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent
I don't get it. What is so different about resumption of play? So following a time-out or intermission, if a team isn't ready you put the ball down and start counting. If they aren't there after 5 seconds, you call a violation. Then you do the same for the other team. After that, it's a T.

So isn't that would you would do in a situation that WASN'T after a T.O. or intermission? What makes resumption of play special?

I think the difference is the escalation of the penalty to technical foul. In instances other then after timeouts and intermissions, there is no provision for an automatic technical foul for failing to be ready to put the ball in play on the second failure to be ready.

I suppose I can imagine assessing a team technical foul as in 10-5-b if it occurs often or is obviously intentional.

BktBallRef Tue Oct 10, 2006 10:40am

Also, there's a much greater difference with regard to a FT. Resumption of play allows you to avoid calling the technical foul immediately

rainmaker Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:23am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rick Durkee
Insert cool signature line here!

Hey, who gave you permission to use my signature line??

Inthe case of a throw-in, the difference between "putting the ball down" in resuming play situations and non-resuming-play situations is that when you are resuming play, the timing is more prescribed and less open to judgment. After a time-out, there's no reason for further delay, and you can more quickly put the ball down. During a normal dead ball period, you might get there eventually, but you are more flexible in allowing some jockying and being oblivious on the part of the players. The procedure itself looks the same once you get it going. Except in resuming play with a free throw.

Kevzebra Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:37am

After half time, (this is NCAA Womens stuff here) if the team is not on the floor, you are to start the time out timer (set to one minute) and then assess a delay (indirect) technical. If there are on the floor, I would say putting the ball down after clearly identifying who needs to inbound it will do!

bob jenkins Tue Oct 10, 2006 11:40am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevzebra
After half time, (this is NCAA Womens stuff here) if the team is not on the floor, you are to start the time out timer (set to one minute) and then assess a delay (indirect) technical. If there are on the floor, I would say putting the ball down after clearly identifying who needs to inbound it will do!

The same is (generally) true in FED -- if the team isn't on the floor and delays the game, it's a T. IF they are on the floor, use the resumption of play procedure.

bob jenkins Wed Oct 11, 2006 08:34am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mendy Trent
I don't get it. What is so different about resumption of play? So following a time-out or intermission, if a team isn't ready you put the ball down and start counting. If they aren't there after 5 seconds, you call a violation. Then you do the same for the other team. After that, it's a T.

So isn't that would you would do in a situation that WASN'T after a T.O. or intermission? What makes resumption of play special?

Case 10.4.1c provides one difference


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:37pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1