Simultaneous basket interference by both teams

[TimTaylor]

JV boys game. A1 shoots from about 14' out, shot is slightly short and the ball bounces up off the front of the rim, hits the backboard, then goes in. Now the fun part - while the ball is in the cylinder, but before it drops through the rim, both A3 & B3 grab a handfull of net (yes it caused the rim to move). The decision we made on the spot was to wave off the basket, then go with the possession arrow for the subsequent spot inbound.

Any thoughts on this? I thought about it on the drive home and don't see how we could have done anything else......did we miss anything?

[Nevadaref]

You nailed it. No basket, AP throw-in per the penalty section covering 9-11+12.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

JV boys game. A1 shoots from about 14' out, shot is slightly short and the ball bounces up off the front of the rim, hits the backboard, then goes in. Now the fun part - while the ball is in the cylinder, but before it drops through the rim, both A3 & B3 grab a handfull of net (yes it caused the rim to move). The decision we made on the spot was to wave off the basket, then go with the possession arrow for the subsequent spot inbound.

Any thoughts on this? I thought about it on the drive home and don't see how we could have done anything else......did we miss anything?

Yup, you missed the call. That's a legal play. You can only call basket interference if they grabbed the net while the ball was on or within the basket. In this case, it was in the cylinder above the basket.

See NFHS rule 4-6-1. You should have had a no-call because there was no violation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You nailed it. No basket, AP throw-in per the penalty section covering 9-11+12.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, you missed the call. That's a legal play. You can only call basket interference if they grabbed the net while the ball was on or within the basket. In this case, it was in the cylinder above the basket.

See NFHS rule 4-6-1. You should have had a no-call because there was no violation.

This situation (ball in cylinder, player touches basket) is always one of the top 2 questions MISSED on our annual exam.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

This situation (ball in cylinder, player touches basket) is always one of the top 2 questions MISSED on our annual exam.

Our's too. It's one of the most misunderstood rules, methinks.

Here's the wierd() part of the play above. As posted by Tim, the only possible call imo could be double technical fouls under R10-3-4. As you well know, Scrappy-Doo, the net is defined as being part of the "basket". Therefore, grabbing the net unless you're trying to avoid injury is a "T", by rule. And, as Tim wrote, both players actually grabbed the net hard enough to cause the rim to move.

Now whether you actually want to call "T"s under those circumstances is a whole 'nother matter. It would have to be awful damn bad before I'd even think about it.

Thoughts?

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, you missed the call. That's a legal play. You can only call basket interference if they grabbed the net while the ball was on or within the basket. In this case, it was in the cylinder above the basket.

See NFHS rule 4-6-1. You should have had a no-call because there was no violation.

Yeah, I know the rule and agree with what you're saying - except they still had contact with the net when the ball entered the basket. The ball hit the front of the rim with a glancing blow, then the backboard immediately above the rim & then through - whole thing took maybe half a second, and they clearly still had contact with the net when the ball started through the rim. Maybe I'm wrong, but in my mind that satisfied the requirement for BI.

As for a double T, we could have "technically" called one, but I don't think it was severe enough in this case to justify it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

Yeah, I know the rule and agree with what you're saying - except they still had contact with the net when the ball entered the basket. The ball hit the front of the rim with a glancing blow, then the backboard immediately above the rim & then through - whole thing took maybe half a second, and they clearly still had contact with the net when the ball started through the rim. Maybe I'm wrong, but in my mind that satisfied the requirement for BI.

As for a double T, we could have "technically" called one, but I don't think it was severe enough in this case to justify it.

If that's what happened, then you would have BI on both players. That's not what you said in your original post though. You said that it occurred while the ball was in the cylinder and also before it dropped through the rim. The cylinder stops at the basket. The "cylinder" and the "basket" are two different animals and are covered differently also, rules-wise.

[Ray_from_Mi]

You got it right. As you say, they had hands on the net while ball was going thru. that's not any different than having a hand pulling on the rim as the ball goes down thru. The key here is that the outside influence (hand pulling on the net) does not directly cause the BI, but its where the ball is relative to that action. If the action caused interferes with the ball in any way, then its BI. In picturing what you described, think what would have been said if no call was made...

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If that's what happened, then you would have BI on both players. That's not what you said in your original post though. You said that it occurred while the ball was in the cylinder and also before it dropped through the rim. The cylinder stops at the basket. The "cylinder" and the "basket" are two different animals and are covered differently also, rules-wise.

Guess I didn't word it very well originally - that's what I get for posting when I'm tired....it was a really long day! Although it happened quickly, it was a very clear sequence - ball hits off rim into backboard, initial contact with net while ball still in cylinder, ball enters basket while hands still in contact with net, immediate whistle for the violation.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Ray_from_Mi

In picturing what you described, think what would have been said if no call was made...

Got that right! Both teams had some size, good skills, and were very athletic. In fact, there were a couple instances earlier on when one coach or the other were yelling for a BI call when the circumstances didn't warrant it. Funny thing is, when I waved off the basket & reported the double violation, neither coach said a word..........

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

Guess I didn't word it very well originally - that's what I get for posting when I'm tired....it was a really long day! Although it happened quickly, it was a very clear sequence - ball hits off rim into backboard, initial contact with net while ball still in cylinder, ball enters basket while hands still in contact with net, immediate whistle for the violation.

That's pretty much what I thought you meant, so I just answered for that.

Of course, JR is right about the specifics of the rule.