The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Backboard slap (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/30031-backboard-slap.html)

btaylor64 Sun Dec 10, 2006 07:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Your statement above <i>verbatim</i> was "Personally If I ruled this <b>AS A LEGITIMATE ATTEMPT TO MAKE A BLOCK</b> 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 <b>whacking the kid</b>...."

NFHS Rule 10-3-5(b) states <i>"A player shall not illegally contact the backboard/ring by <b>INTENTIONALLY</b> slapping or striking the backboard or causing the ring to vibrate while a try or tap is in flight or is touching the backboard or is in the basket or in the cylinder above the basket"</i>

Casebook play 10.3.5(b)
<b>COMMENT:</b> <i>The purpose of the rule is to penalize <b>INTENTIONAL</b> contact with the backboard while a shot or try is involved..."</i>."



NCAA rules are exactly the same. I believe that pro rules are too, but I may be wrong.

Again, that's a very basic rule that you're misinterpreting. As I said before, if you call that in one of your college games, it might just be your last one if an evaluator is watching.

So we are getting technical then. All I would have to do is say that I thought the kid was not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball, whether he was or he wasn't, and then I could T him up. Ok I will do that then, since that is all I would have to tell my boss or anyone else and then they could not argue it. I guess I should have said it this way at the first instead of trying to argue the point.

Jurassic Referee Sun Dec 10, 2006 07:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by btaylor64
So we are getting technical then. All I would have to do is say that I thought the kid was not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball, whether he was or he wasn't, and then I could T him up. Ok I will do that then, since that is all I would have to tell my boss or anyone else and then they could not argue it. I guess I should have said it this way at the first instead of trying to argue the point.

If you call knowing a rule and how it should be called "getting technical", you probably have more than a a few problems as an official imo.:)

You're missing the point. You have absolutely <b>NO</b> rules justification to call a technical foul on a player who rattles the backboard while trying to make a legitimate block. It's legal for that player to hit it as hard as he can if he's going for the ball. All you are doing is making up your own rule again because you don't like the rule that we have(that is, if you actually knew the correct rule in the first place....which I kinda doubt).

If you have an evaluator at one of your college games, you will never get away with trying to bullsh!t him on that one. Never! You'll never get away with that in higher level varsity games either, where the kids play above the rim.

Corndog89 Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:37am

Quote:

Originally Posted by btaylor64
So we are getting technical then. All I would have to do is say that I thought the kid was not making a legitimate attempt to play the ball, whether he was or he wasn't, and then I could T him up. Ok I will do that then, since that is all I would have to tell my boss or anyone else and then they could not argue it. I guess I should have said it this way at the first instead of trying to argue the point.

Glad I'll (likely) never have to work a game with you.

Camron Rust Mon Dec 11, 2006 12:57am

Quote:

Originally Posted by btaylor64
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?

Tell me know you know that! Are you psychic or something?

just another ref Mon Dec 11, 2006 02:06am

Famous quote:
 
(paraphrased) An official must be careful not to, in his own mind, become bigger than the game that he is there to officiate.

.....or something like that. For some reason this came to mind.


Or, in laymen terms: I'm running this game. If the rules are kinda parallel to the way I run it, good. If not, they (everyone else, coaches, players, even partners) will adapt.

TimTaylor Mon Dec 11, 2006 02:16am

The rules and supporting case information are crystal clear. Slapping of the backboard by a defender as part of a legitimate block attempt is not a T.

Running around making up interpretations contrary to the rules, based on what you think might or might not happen, is wrong, and IMHO, unprofessional. How can we expect the participants to conform to the rules if we ourselves choose selectively not to? Some example that sets......

Back In The Saddle Mon Dec 11, 2006 02:30am

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimTaylor
Running around making up interpretations contrary to the rules, based on what you think might or might not happen, is wrong, and IMHO, unprofessional. How can we expect the participants to conform to the rules if we ourselves choose selectively not to? Some example that sets......

Kinda reminds me of a POE I heard not so long ago. Hmmmm, where could that have been...... :cool:

Mark Dexter Tue Dec 12, 2006 11:47am

Quote:

Originally Posted by btaylor64
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?

Yes. It's called basket interference for a reason.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:46am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1