Well, if it's not suspended, then why doesn't the net fall on the floor?:confused:

Riddle me that, Batman.

Is your dinner plate suspended from the table? No. Yet it doesn't fall to the floor.

Do you really have no idea what suspended means?

"To hang so as to allow free movement" (American Heritage Dictionary).

Do you really have no idea what <b>hanging</b> means?

Isn't the net still <b>HANGING</b> from the ring even when it's bottom is curled up on top of the ring?

"Hanging":- from Dictionary.com--<i>"to fasten or attach a thing so that it is only supported from <b>ABOVE</b> or at a point near it's top; suspend."</i>

If the net is on top of the ring, tell me how it can then be supported from <b>above</b>, Camron?

Nice try picking out a definition that could be skewed to fit your skewed thinking.

Back in the old days, the netting could get caught up in the rim "hook & eye" gizmos after a swish. But usually it was not in a position to reject a ball on a shot. Nothing a good layup wouldn't cure.

http://photos.jibble.org/albums/Hast.../Mole_hill.jpg

Here's my last contribution to this thread. Fix it. But don't stop the game. If it happens more than once, have a kid stand near the endline and poke it with a broom or something once the players are on the other end of the court.

Nobody is saying that you can't fix it. Just don't stop the game to do it. JMHO.

You are wise beyond your years.

Yada, yada, yada....

It's the only definition that remotely fits (from dictionary.com) I didn't pick one.

You just made my point for me. Even hanging say that the support is above the object. If the net is over the ring, the ring can't be above the net.

There is a huge difference in you and me. I know this ruling was old and I am not saying it has to be followed to the letter like you do all the time.

Actually you would be wrong (again). This was addressed in the NF Guidebook which is put out by the NF and Referee Magazine. Officials from Illinois get a free copy when they attend IHSA Rules Meetings. And it could not have been more than 3 years ago. I am out of town and do not have access to my old guidebooks to give an exact year. I will also say that what the NF said to do was not a hard line ruling. They gave a couple of ways to handle this and basically put the onus on the schools and game management to fix this problem. I neither agree nor disagree either way with the position of the NF. I just said how it was talked about through the NF and how they addressed this situation.

Peace

After everything I have read here debating this, I would say I would stop the game based on rule 1-10-1 ... 15-18 inches in length, suspended from beneath the rim.

or if possible and known - change the nets. Not fair to the shooters to have to shoot at a not normal looknig target.

Ok, I went and found the book of which you speak.
http://secure.referee.com/index.cfm?...Product_ID=307

It is not immediately clear who is responsible for the content. Is it Referee, Inc., NASO, the NFHS, all of the above, or some of each. These groups are contracting with each other more everyday and now have joint ventures and publications. We've had that discussion before, so I don't wish to rehash it. Anyway as that is a minor point, I'm not going to quibble over it. I'm just confused as to why the NFHS would publish the Officials Manual and also partake in the writing of this Officials Guidebook.

Anyway what I would like to focus upon is that I would like to see exactly what was written in this book from whichever officiating source it comes on the issue of the flipped up net. I'm sure that it could be helpful.

Thanks for making me aware of this publication.

I am not going to get in a big debate either, but when the NF slaps their name all over this publication, they are signing off on the content. So as far as I am concerned, it is from the NF directly. Understand that many things discussed in this Guidebook are not rulings or "official" remarks. Many are just suggestions and little tidbits to do things better or look at a particular situation in a different way. This was not a comment like a POE, Editorial change or a Rules change. This was just a little article about nets getting caught up. No different than when in this publication they discussed how to deal with coaches in difficult situations. I take this content the same way I do when I read the Simplified and Illustrated Rulebooks. It is published by NASO but the content is signed off on by the NF. I think the NF likes the software that NASO uses and their database of officiating content to help them produce a good product.

Peace

Virginia State Interpreter Says "Play On"
 

After seeing the lack of consensus in this thread, I contacted the Virginia High School League's state basketball interpreter. She replied:

"DO NOTHING. Officials should not stop play to fix the net, even if the
team playing toward that basket complains."

You should have done this anyway. All we are here are a bunch of "talking heads" in most cases are not official spokespeople for any organization or group what would have any power to give a personal interpretation. Now if Chuck was here all bets would be off. :D

Peace

Fwiw, it was my understanding that the only books actually certified for sale by the NFHS will have the NFHS logo on their cover. NASO only sells 2 books approved by the NFHS, I think. They are the "Simplified and Illustrated" comic book and the "Rules By Topic". Any other mechanics books, etc. issued by NASO may be correct as per the NFHS issued rules books and the "OFFICIALS MANUAL", but they are not guaranteed to be correct. If there are any differences, and I don't have a clue whether there are any, then the FED MANUAL is the one to follow.

That's my understanding fwiw.

The Guidebook I am referring to have the NF logo on it and from memory is called the NF Guidebook. You are making way too much out of this to get around the fact that the NF puts out information in this publication as another source for content. I also seriously do not think Referee Magazine/NASO would not at the very least confirm information that they get and put out in this guide. Also they get direct quotes from Mary Struckoff and other Committee members when talking about these issues. They are telling you what the committee wants you to know, not what they think they want you to know. When I get home and look sometime tonight, I will explain what is on the book. I even believe they make a statement in the book that this is a NF Publication. This has nothing to do with Referee Magazine other than the fact NASO is involved and NASO uses many of the same illustrations that are produced for Referee Magazine. I did not buy these publications, I get them free every single year and in every sport when I attend each Rules meeting. I usually have them with me when I officiate as a reference guide to new rules or POEs before the season.

Peace