Backboard slap

[sj]

It's nothing even though it probably should be something. But that's another discussion.

[j51969]

I think the NF needs to help on this. This comes up every year, even if it doesn't happen that often. I think it is entirely reasonable that a player going for the block can still effect the outcome of the shot. If you look hard enough in the rule book you can find something to justify just about anything. A B.I. isn't the call right now. But I don't see how you could argue that call in a situation where the official clearly see it effect the outcome of the shot. In the spirit of fair play it would be nice if this was addressed in the future.

[jcarter]

Originally Posted by j51969

I think the NF needs to help on this. This comes up every year, even if it doesn't happen that often. I think it is entirely reasonable that a player going for the block can still effect the outcome of the shot. If you look hard enough in the rule book you can find something to justify just about anything. A B.I. isn't the call right now. But I don't see how you could argue that call in a situation where the official clearly see it effect the outcome of the shot. In the spirit of fair play it would be nice if this was addressed in the future.

That i can completely agree with. exspecially being some what new i get many asignments in older gyms where it does not take a whole lot of pressure to get one of the old long extended supports rocking.

[Jay R]

It is BI in FIBA. Look at that, FIBA actulally has good rules.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by j51969

I think the NF needs to help on this. This comes up every year, even if it doesn't happen that often. I think it is entirely reasonable that a player going for the block can still effect the outcome of the shot. If you look hard enough in the rule book you can find something to justify just about anything. A B.I. isn't the call right now. But I don't see how you could argue that call in a situation where the official clearly see it effect the outcome of the shot. In the spirit of fair play it would be nice if this was addressed in the future.

Please don't make up your own rules. The NFHS has made it clear how they want this called. Just follow what they say.

CONTACTING THE BACKBOARD
10.3.5 SITUATION: A1 tries for a goal, and (a) B1 jumps and attempts to block the shot but instead slaps or strikes the backboard and the ball goes into the basket; or (b) B1 vibrates the ring as a result of pulling on the net and the ball does not enter the basket. RULING: In (a) legal and the basket counts; and (b) a technical foul is charged to B1 and there is no basket. COMMENT: The purpose of the rule is to penalize intentional contact with the backboard while a shot or try is involved or placing a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage. A player who strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-7.

[Bad Zebra]

Originally Posted by jodibuck

... The officials for the Varsity contest were watching the play and question why I didn't call a technical foul...One of the officials insisted you have to ... .

This is a sore point with me..Vets who don't know the correct application of a rule trying to correct newer officials. Good for you for getting it right. Shame on the goofy vets for pestering you. Not to say I don't appreciate feedback, but if you're not sure ya know the rule...zip it!

[DownTownTonyBrown]

Someone mentioned that is surely affects the outcome of the shot.

Perhaps. The rim may move back and forth an inch or so but not much.

Occasionally, though, I think you could be right... a shot that would have missed suddenly becomes made because the basket moved underneath the ball.

The correct answer (per NFHS rule) is, as several have said, no T on a legitimate shot block attempt and absolutely not basket interference.

[btaylor64]

Personally If I rule this to be a legitimate attempt at a block and I am 100% sure that the hit of the backboard caused the board to shake hard enough that it caused the missed shot I'm whacking the kid as it is not BI and cannot be BI.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

Personally If I rule this to be a legitimate attempt at a block and I am 100% sure that the hit of the backboard caused the board to shake hard enough that it caused the missed shot I'm whacking the kid as it is not BI and cannot be BI.

What rules backing do you have to call a technical foul on this play?

You're completely wrong by rule. You're also making up your own rules again. And again, that's ridiculous.

Btw, NCAA rules are the same as high school. It isn't a technical in either ruleset. Ever!

You know, for someone who claims to work college and pro games, you seem to lack a basic understanding of some very simple rules. JMO.

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

What rules backing do you have to call a technical foul on this play?

You're completely wrong by rule. You're also making up your own rules again. And again, that's ridiculous.

Btw, NCAA rules are the same as high school. It isn't a technical in either ruleset. Ever!

You know, for someone who claims to work college and pro games, you seem to lack a basic understanding of some very simple rules. JMO.

So it is within the spirit and intent of the rule to let this kid legitimately attempt a block, but in doing so shaking the backboard so violently that it causes the kid to miss the attempt that would have otherwise went in?

You seem to lack a basic understanding of spirit and intent of the rules. JMO though.

I guess by being so predicated on the rules and their exact meaning that you have never had a problem with a coach.