Five second count on a drive

[Back In The Saddle]

We had an interesting discussion in our association meeting last night about the five second closely guarded count. Imagine that a dribbler gets head and shoulders past his defender on a drive to the basket only to be picked up by a secondary defender who was already within six feet (so at least one defender was continuously within six feet the whole time). Would you continue your count? If so, why? If not, why not? Would it make any difference to you if it were near the basket or 40 feet away?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

We had an interesting discussion in our association meeting last night about the five second closely guarded count. Imagine that a dribbler gets head and shoulders past his defender on a drive to the basket only to be picked up by a secondary defender who was already within six feet (so at least one defender was continuously within six feet the whole time). Would you continue your count? If so, why? If not, why not? Would it make any difference to you if it were near the basket or 40 feet away?

There's your answer right there.

From the RULING in casebook play 9.10.1SitB- "There is no requirement for the defensive player to remain the same during the count as long as A1 is closely guarded throughout".

It's a violation anywhere on the court. The dribbler only got head and shoulders past one defender, not both of them. If the other defender was within 6 feet, the count simply continues.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

There's your answer right there.

From the RULING in casebook play 9.10.1SitB- "There is no requirement for the defensive player to remain the same during the count as long as A1 is closely guarded throughout".

It's a violation anywhere on the court. The dribbler only got head and shoulders past one defender, not both of them. If the other defender was within 6 feet, the count simply continues.

cough cough...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

cough cough...

YeahYeahYeah......

It's a violation anywhere in the frontcourt, except for maybe Wimmen's basketball of which I know nuthin' about.

[Larks]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It's a violation anywhere on the court.

Dont Put that Pivot foot back down!!

[ATXCoach]

Wait, am i reading this correctly?

A1 dribbling around can guarded by B1, B2, and B3 each individually so long as one of them is always within six feet and the closely guarded count continues and does not restart with each change of defender???

Is the rule the same in NCAA and NCAA-W?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by ATXCoach

Wait, am i reading this correctly?

A1 dribbling around can guarded by B1, B2, and B3 each individually so long as one of them is always within six feet and the closely guarded count continues and does not restart with each change of defender???

Is the rule the same in NCAA and NCAA-W?

Yes, in FED.

In NCAA it must be the same defender -- when there's a switch, the count starts over.

[ATXCoach]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Yes, in FED.

In NCAA it must be the same defender -- when there's a switch, the count starts over.

I did not know that. thanks for clearing it up.

[rainmaker]

I know I'll probably be beheaded for saying this, but you'd better check around in your area before you call this. I know what the strict letter of the law says, and I'm not saying that JR is incorrect in his interp. But I also know that some rules are called with local variations that directly contradict the book, and whether or not I or anyone else approve of this, that's the way it's done. I'd check with a local interpreter before i called this in any game.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I know I'll probably be beheaded for saying this, but you'd better check around in your area before you call this. I know what the strict letter of the law says, and I'm not saying that JR is incorrect in his interp. But I also know that some rules are called with local variations that directly contradict the book, and whether or not I or anyone else approve of this, that's the way it's done. I'd check with a local interpreter before i called this in any game.

I'll just say that there was a rather spirited discussion about whether this should be called or not. Yes, the rule is clear. But is the intent of the rule to give the ball to the defense when the offense is actively advancing toward the basket?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

I'll just say that there was a rather spirited discussion about whether this should be called or not. Yes, the rule is clear. But is the intent of the rule to give the ball to the defense when the offense is actively advancing toward the basket?

The intent of the rule is to reward good defense. If a defender is in front of a dribbler that is actively advancing towards the basket, why should you penalize them for making that good defensive play?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I know I'll probably be beheaded for saying this, but you'd better check around in your area before you call this. I know what the strict letter of the law says, and I'm not saying that JR is incorrect in his interp. But I also know that some rules are called with local variations that directly contradict the book, and whether or not I or anyone else approve of this, that's the way it's done. I'd check with a local interpreter before i called this in any game.

Are you inferring that Howard is teaching Portland officials to ignore that particular rule?

[Lotto]

Originally Posted by ATXCoach

Wait, am i reading this correctly?

A1 dribbling around can guarded by B1, B2, and B3 each individually so long as one of them is always within six feet and the closely guarded count continues and does not restart with each change of defender???

Is the rule the same in NCAA and NCAA-W?

No. It is the same in NCAA-M only.

In NCAA-W there is no closely guarded count while A1 is dribbling, only while she is holding the ball. The count happens anywhere on the court, not just in the frontcourt.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Are you inferring that Howard is teaching Portland officials to ignore that particular rule?

I'm not inferring anything, the reader infers, the speaker (or writer) implies!

Okay, well I had to do that since Mr. Annoying Grammar Guy has yet to be replaced.

No, not at all. Howard is a by the book kinda guy -- except for 3 seconds. But my point is exactly that in areas where there is a strong tradition of how to interpret things, it's best to go by that tradition, just like we use Howard's 3 second rule here, rather than the legality of the book.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

I'm not inferring anything, the reader infers, the speaker (or writer) implies!

Okay, well I had to do that since Mr. Annoying Grammar Guy has yet to be replaced.

How about Ms. Annoying Grammar Gal?