|
|||
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?
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
?????
What do you mean? Are you suggesting to call something because the player admitted it?
__________________
Quitters never win, winners never quit, but those who never win AND never quit are idiots. |
|
|||
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.
Last edited by armymanjones; Thu Jan 04, 2007 at 05:10pm. |
|
|||
Quote:
If the ring was grasped, it's a "T". Rule 10-3-4. If the player gained an advantage by touching the ring while getting the rebound, it's a "T". Rule 10-3-5(a). Judgement call. |
|
|||
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. |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
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
__________________
Dan Ivey Tri-City Sports Officials Asso. (TCSOA) Member since 1989 Richland, WA |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
|
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Did I miss something?!? | tjones1 | Basketball | 14 | Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:42pm |
Duke/Miss | Snake~eyes | Basketball | 5 | Mon Mar 21, 2005 01:15pm |
Did I miss something in the book? | Ref Ump Welsch | Softball | 3 | Sat Aug 07, 2004 11:12pm |
Kentucky/Miss. St. | whistleone | Basketball | 27 | Fri Jan 16, 2004 03:31pm |