Basket Interference Problem

[lukealex]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Before you can explain the rule properly, Luke, you have to understand it. Your whole premise is completely wrong. If B1 tried to block the shot, it is NEVER a technical foul. You can also never have a BI call unless B1 touched the ring, net or the ball in the cylinder. Touching the backboard is never a part of BI.

I do know the rule and after reading my OP again I realize it doesn't look like I do. I meant it could be a T, I was more looking for advice on explaining the rule to someone who didn't understand the application of the situation. You also don't have to refer me to case 10.3.5 since I mentioned it in my OP.

[btaylor64]

LukeAlex you have no chance of winning this battle. RUN AWAY! I tried to fight this one a little while back, but could not pierce the hard headed armour. Most everybody on here, myself NOT included, will tell you that since it is considered a legitimate attempt at a block that it can't be BI nor a T, no matter how hard the kid shook the backboard. I say even though you thought it was legit attempt at a block and you also thought the basket had a possibility of going in had the backboard and rim not gotten shaken to high hell, that you give the kid the T, and just tell everyone you thought he slapped it intentionally. No one would ever know what you thought. The only thing they could say is they thought he was making a legit block attempt, and in that case who cares what they think. You JUDGED the play like refs are supposed to do and in your judgement he "intentionally" slapped the backboard and are thereby supported by rule. That's just me though.

[Adam]

[lukealex]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

LukeAlex you have no chance of winning this battle. RUN AWAY! I tried to fight this one a little while back, but could not pierce the hard headed armour. Most everybody on here, myself NOT included, will tell you that since it is considered a legitimate attempt at a block that it can't be BI nor a T, no matter how hard the kid shook the backboard. I say even though you thought it was legit attempt at a block and you also thought the basket had a possibility of going in had the backboard and rim not gotten shaken to high hell, that you give the kid the T, and just tell everyone you thought he slapped it intentionally. No one would ever know what you thought. The only thing they could say is they thought he was making a legit block attempt, and in that case who cares what they think. You JUDGED the play like refs are supposed to do and in your judgement he "intentionally" slapped the backboard and are thereby supported by rule. That's just me though.

I do agree with the argument, if a block is attempted, no call. I worded my OP wrong, simple. The slap has to be intentional, also simple.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

LukeAlex you have no chance of winning this battle. RUN AWAY! I tried to fight this one a little while back, but could not pierce the hard headed armour. Most everybody on here, myself NOT included, will tell you that since it is considered a legitimate attempt at a block that it can't be BI nor a T, no matter how hard the kid shook the backboard. I say even though you thought it was legit attempt at a block and you also thought the basket had a possibility of going in had the backboard and rim not gotten shaken to high hell, that you give the kid the T, and just tell everyone you thought he slapped it intentionally. No one would ever know what you thought. The only thing they could say is they thought he was making a legit block attempt, and in that case who cares what they think. You JUDGED the play like refs are supposed to do and in your judgement he "intentionally" slapped the backboard and are thereby supported by rule. That's just me though.

It's awful hard to win a battle when you're defenseless.

You were wrong, you are wrong, and it looks like you will still be wrong- forever. Too bad.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

LukeAlex you have no chance of winning this battle. RUN AWAY! I tried to fight this one a little while back, but could not pierce the hard headed armour. Most everybody on here, myself NOT included, will tell you that since it is considered a legitimate attempt at a block that it can't be BI nor a T, no matter how hard the kid shook the backboard. I say even though you thought it was legit attempt at a block and you also thought the basket had a possibility of going in had the backboard and rim not gotten shaken to high hell, that you give the kid the T, and just tell everyone you thought he slapped it intentionally. No one would ever know what you thought. The only thing they could say is they thought he was making a legit block attempt, and in that case who cares what they think. You JUDGED the play like refs are supposed to do and in your judgement he "intentionally" slapped the backboard and are thereby supported by rule. That's just me though.

Are you actually recommending that an official be dishonest?

If an official has poor judgment, mechanics, people skills, or anything else, I could live with that if he was honest and had integrity. Those are two things that an official cannot lack.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Are you actually recommending that an official be dishonest?

Yes, he is.

Sad, isn't it?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

LukeAlex you have no chance of winning this battle. RUN AWAY! I tried to fight this one a little while back, but could not pierce the hard headed armour. Most everybody on here, myself NOT included, will tell you that since it is considered a legitimate attempt at a block that it can't be BI nor a T, no matter how hard the kid shook the backboard. I say even though you thought it was legit attempt at a block and you also thought the basket had a possibility of going in had the backboard and rim not gotten shaken to high hell, that you give the kid the T, and just tell everyone you thought he slapped it intentionally. No one would ever know what you thought. The only thing they could say is they thought he was making a legit block attempt, and in that case who cares what they think. You JUDGED the play like refs are supposed to do and in your judgement he "intentionally" slapped the backboard and are thereby supported by rule. That's just me though.

Ben, that is totally wrong and I defy you to find a single D-1 ref you look towards as a mentor to back your opinion.

You are manufacturing a rules interpretation to meet your own personal view instead of following guidelines in the book.

I don't understand your reasoning here. Why would a 'good' official go looking for a reason to call a Tech where one is not warranted by rule.

If you want to call more Techs, then concentrate on some of the unsporting behavior and bench decorum infractions that too many officials let slide by.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Ben, that is totally wrong and I defy you to find a single D-1 ref you look towards as a mentor to back your opinion.

Whoa there, News. Ben IS a college official. He said so right in this post. How could an experienced college official like Ben be wrong? Ben don't need no damn mentor.

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...877#post334877

Of course, Ben also admitted in the same post that as of a few months ago, he had never done a high school game at any level in his life. So... maybe Ben can be excused for not knowing basic NFHS rules. After all, if he's doing nothing but college games, who needs them? That's forgetting, of course, that most basic high school and college rules are similar, but whatthehell......

[btaylor64]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Ben, that is totally wrong and I defy you to find a single D-1 ref you look towards as a mentor to back your opinion.

You are manufacturing a rules interpretation to meet your own personal view instead of following guidelines in the book.

I don't understand your reasoning here. Why would a 'good' official go looking for a reason to call a Tech where one is not warranted by rule.

If you want to call more Techs, then concentrate on some of the unsporting behavior and bench decorum infractions that too many officials let slide by.

I don't want to call more T's. I was just trying to make a point that it just seems unfair to the offensive team to allow a kid to slap the backboard so hard that in your judgement it caused the shot to be missed, and that we are not going to do anything about it. Ask Roger or Mike what they would do on this play BadNewsRef.

[Adam]

Ask his orthopedic surgeon if it's unfair. If a kid slaps the backboard so hard you think it's unfair to the offense, he's likely broken a couple of bones.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by btaylor64

I don't want to call more T's. I was just trying to make a point that it just seems unfair to the offensive team to allow a kid to slap the backboard so hard that in your judgement it caused the shot to be missed, and that we are not going to do anything about it. Ask Roger or Mike what they would do on this play BadNewsRef.

I have had this discussion with a very close friend of mine who has the same supervisor as Mike & Roger do.

My friend called me in on a 3-way telecon because his brother was mistakenly thinking along the same lines that you are.

[BillyMac]

Veteran officials. Please help me remember. I've only been holding on to my old rule books for about ten years or so.

At one time, many years ago, possibly as many as twenty-years ago, didn't the NFHS rule concerning contact with the backboard indicate that a technical foul was to be called if the contact caused the backboard and/or basket to VIBRATE. And if so, wasn't the rule changed, many years ago, to indicate that if contact was made during a legitimate attempt to block a shot that no technical foul was to be called, even if such contact caused the backboard and/or the basket to vibrate, as the rule now states. In any case, during the twenty-six years that I've been officiating, this situation has never been associated with basket interference, and the basket could never be awarded for contact with the backboard.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Veteran officials. Please help me remember. I've only been holding on to my old rule books for about ten years or so.

At one time, many years ago, possibly as many as twenty-years ago, didn't the NFHS rule concerning contact with the backboard indicate that a technical foul was to be called if the contact caused the backboard and/or basket to VIBRATE. And if so, wasn't the rule changed, many years ago, to indicate that if contact was made during a legitimate attempt to block a shot that no technical foul was to be called, even if such contact caused the backboard and/or the basket to vibrate, as the rule now states.

I can't remember any kind of rule like the one that you're talking about, Billy. And I go back to 1959.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I can't remember any kind of rule like the one that you're talking about, Billy. And I go back to 1959.

B.C.