What did the crew miss?
 

A veteran official recently told me about a sitch that happened in his game.

A1 attempted a shot...A2 jumped and secured the ball, with one hand, as the ball was bouncing off the glass. (Not in the cylinder) As a result, A2 scored the FG.

Coach B was screaming that A2 had touched the rim with his off-hand.

No one in the 3-person crew saw this "touching."

Following the next dead-ball....curious, the official asked the player if he indeed "grabbed or touched" the rim. The player hung his head a little and said..."Yea, but just a little."

I asked the official what he did then...he said nothing.
I then asked him what he would have had if the crew had noticed the "touching".

He said, "basket interference."

I asked him if he might have had a technical foul.

Watta ya got?

?????
 

What do you mean? Are you suggesting to call something because the player admitted it?

No, he's asking what the call is if the officials had seen it. It's a technical foul, by the way.

Why is touching the rim when the ball is not in the cylinder a technical foul?

You have nothing. This is in no way a correctable error. You just missed it. Simple!! If you saw touch and felt he did it to gain an advantage or if he grasp the rim you could have a tech.

Can't be BI because the ball wasn't on or within the basket or in the cylinder when the player touched it.

If the ring was <b>grasped</b>, it's a "T". Rule 10-3-4. If the player gained an advantage by <b>touching</b> the ring while getting the rebound, it's a "T". Rule 10-3-5(a). Judgement call.

It's possible as per NFHS rule 10-3-5(a).

According to FIBA Rules no infraction occurred. I'm curious to see how American rules handle this.

31.2.4 Interference occurs during a shot for a field goal when:
• A player touches the basket [...] while the ball is in contact with the ring. [...]
• An offensive player causes the backboard or the ring to vibrate in such a way that, in the judgement of the official, the ball has been caused to enter the basket.

The 'touching' was so light that neither C nor T saw it, I can assume it didn't affect the shot.

38.3.1 A technical foul is a player non-contact foul of a behavioural nature including [...]
• Hanging on the ring in such a way that the weight of the player is supported by the ring, unless a player grasps the ring momentarily following a dunk shot [...].

So no technical either.

If he touched it to gain an advantage rule 10.3.5a it could be

Thank you. I was thinking perhaps his hand just accidentally brushed against the rim, since none of the refs saw it. I would think if he grabbed it or used it for leverage to gain an advantage it would be seen. Hard to say based on the post how it was actually touched.

If he touched it to gain an advantage 10.3.5a it could be

That's exactly why I said that it was always a judgement call, Smitty. "Accidentally" is OK. Gaining an advantage isn't. Mileage may vary.:)

I was just trying to give a few "hints" as to what an official may call. That is also why I muddled it with a possible correctable error call.

As usual...JR answered the sitch with references. Snagwells got what I was looking for as well.

If the crew had judged the touch to be an advantage...you have a T on A2.

JR...I didn't want to spoon feed this one...but, I was going to use the "picture book" reference on pg. 117... 10-3-6

I'm just saying.... :D

Gee, I don't know, Adam. I kinda like the "snag" reference. like being a good rebounder? like Snagletooth the Lion? Snaq sort of sounds like a big oaf, or someone who eats too much. But I'll be merciful and abide by your preferences...