Net Hung Up
 

A1 takes a jump shot from near the free thrown line. The shot goes in, but as a result, the net flops up on the rim and stays there. (It is not hooked, but just lying in that position.) Should the official: (1) stop play in order to clear the net; (2) allow play to continue unless and until the team whose net is flopped up on the rim requests that it be cleared; (3) ignore the flopped net altogether. Is there any rulebook, casebook or official's manual support?

The answer is your number 1.

Unless Team B initiates a fastbreak after the made basket by A1....stop play, free up the net....then put ball into play with B throw-in from the endline....remember B can "run" the baseline once you administer the throw-in. If team B is in a fastbreak....wait till first dead ball to take care of the net.

Don't have my books....but can't remember....other than maybe Casebook....that there may be this situation. I'll see if I can find it....unless someone else posts it :o

Juulie, are you attempting to rustle a certain, little, short, referee to come out of hiding? I was just reading this old thread this morning. Mr. AnnoyingGrammarGuy sure got riled up during this session.

Heck no!! I miss him a lot around here, things just are too tall without him, but I understand his reasons for going "into hiding" and I certainly don't want to interfere with those!!

And for the record, I agree with him. But I don't want to argue about it. So I took the easy way out.

Play on. There's no rules support for stopping play under either Fed or NCAA.

I don't know if its still there, but there was either a case play or something in the back of the old Fed books in the comments section that addressed this. It said to handle it (i.e. change nets) in warm-ups if possible, but if not continue on.

Bingo.<i></i>

I must admit I have the bad habit of stopping play immediately even though one of my most respected mentors has always told me and my peers to play on. :(

It something I need to condition myself to stop doing.

By rule or the lack of a rule or procedure, you are not supposed to stop play on a hung net.

I had a VB game earlier this year and my partner had been watching the nets in warmups and said to me that the nets to to get hung and told me DO NOT stop play for this. I did not question him at the time just said o.k.

Sure enough, the net gets hung early in the game and I stopped play - there was no full court press or fast break - and fixed the nets. He was not happy with me. But, he got over it.

Was I wrong?

I actually talk about this in pregame with my crew. I have some partners who feel strongly that we should stop the game and others who feel equally strongly that we should not.
We make a decision how we are going to handle it that night and then stay consistent.

Personally, I believe that an immediate stoppage is the way to go as the basket does not meet the requirements of 1-10-1 with the net in that position. It is to be "suspended beneath the ring."

That decides it for me. I will stop everytime based on that rule. Thanks NevadaRef, you always bring it!

A couple of years ago the NF put out a ruling that said we should only stop this maybe the first or second time it happens. If it continues to happen the NF said to not stop play all game for this reason. The main remedy they suggested was to have the net changed. Now this was in their NF Guidebook that is produced every year. I believe this was about 2 years old. Not sure that ruling still applies, but that is the last I heard someone mention it.

Peace

I hope whatever was living in the nest thanked you after the game.:D

O' irony of ironies! Rut is quoting an old ruling by the NFHS which is not in a current book. :D

PS Whatever was put out if it was by the NFHS, I believe it was a lot more than two years ago. Perhaps what you saw came from the IHSA.

Seeing your in your usual "literal" mood, Nevada, after stopping play why don't you also give the shooter a technical foul for delaying the game by causing the net to hang up? That's what rule 10-3-6(a) says, and applying that rule makes just as much sense as trying to apply 1-10-1.

I see that you took your funny pills today, JR. :D That's nice.

I'm surprised that nobody suggested that you do NOT jump up and try to fix it yourself. I assume you already knew that.

That's one way to quickly lose all the cool points you thought you might-a had.

_____________________________

Nope, I don't think this was just an IHSA thing. But it must have been a long time back because I don't remember it in the last 8-9 years. Was it before that Rut? Nevada, as for your immediate stoppage, you're going to stop a fast break by the opponents to fix a net. I don't think so. Just wait for a dead ball then take care of it if it hasn't been taken care of by a shot.

________________________
Yeah, like I'm gonna reach the net! :D

There was an actual case play at one time iirc. And it did say to wait for a play stoppage to fix the net. Like many case plays, it simply disappeared with no comment.

What fast break? :confused:
Don't we have a dead ball on the goal that was scored which caused the net to get hung up? :confused:

I'm taking care of this right away during that dead ball.

If a player <b>immediately</b> grabs the ball coming out of the basket before it touches the floor and <b>immediately</b> steps OOB and <b>immediately</b> turns to throw the quick outlet pass, you're still gonna blow your whistle, Nevada? Even though that "dead ball" lasted less than a second? Even though you're probably not completely sure in that little space of time that the net will still stay up there?

Somehow, that doesn't really surprise me.

My thoughts are you do not stop play to fix the net.
It shall remain in that position until cleared by some other
method, another basket, player pulling down, etc.
For those of you that DO stop play, will you allow a sub
sitting at the table in the game?

If the game is stopped, substitution is allowed.

Rule and/or mechanics reference, please. http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...es/redflag.gif

_______________________________________

Most of the time I see that the thing is hung up is after the play had already restarted. I don't look at the net after each shot. I'm watching the players, inbounds play, or breaking to my spot. I'm sure there are plenty of fans who will yell about the net if we don't see it.

Why didn't scrapper suggest that? http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...s/blueevil.gif

Hadn't happened to me all season. Then I saw this thread yesterday.

It happened twice last night, once on a two-handed dunk.

We killed it both times.

For me it depends on the situation. If the new offense is grabbing the ball from the net and looking to push it, I'll let it go. If not, I'll kill it.

Not to be nosy, but are his reasons public knowledge? If so, why is he "in hiding?" Just curious.

He's not hiding.

If you have a large bag with all the items you need to officiate, you pull out your can of starch and spray the net. If you don't, you never stop a running clock to fix the net.

Mregor

Chuck started doing some NCAA D1 games this year. He didn't think that it would be a good idea to continue posting and maybe get involved in confrontations, flames, etc. It was his own personal choice. I can see his reasoning. You never know who is reading these forums or how they might react to some posts.

He is certainly missed.
http://www.1000smilies.com/tombstone.gif
<b>Chuck Elias</b>

On the bright side, it looks like he has been ably replaced by Old School and Scrappy1.

Rule 1-10-1:
...and a white-cord 12-mesh net, 15 to 18 inches in length, suspended from beneath the ring.


If it is laying over the top of the ring, it is not suspended beneath.

This explanation strikes me as being, what someone recently called, overly ANALytical. JMHO

____________________________________

Hey TJ1,
Do you have a can of spray starch in your bag?:p I have a can of static guard but no spray starch!

There's a lot of Nevada Ref in you, Camron.

And that ain't a good thing.....:D

There does seem to be a growing resemblance doesn't there.

Where is the rule, case play, or NFHS interpretation that states you stop the game and pull the net back down?

Okay, the secret is out. ChuckElias now posts as Old School! http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...es/roflmao.gif

Where's the one that states that you don't? :)

OK. So Player A1 dunks the ball cleanly and the breakaway rim doesn't return to level. Do you just keep playing with the rim at an angle? I don't know of any rule or case play that addresses it. The team should have a basket as specified in the rules at which to shot their shots....and that doesn't not include a basket that is partially obscured by a net over the top which is far more likely to negatively affect the shot than help it..

So now there's supposed to be a list of rules that tell officials what not to do?

Is that supposed to be an answer to my question?

I've never seen a rim not return to it's proper position after a dunk.
I've never seen a net prevent a ball from going through the basket.

Still waiting on that rule, case play, or interp?

NFHS rule 6.7. That rule states very explicitly when the clock should be stopped. If the FED had wanted to stop play for nets hung up, they sureasheck would have put it in 6-7 so that all of us knew and followed a standard procedure. It ain't in there, is it?

So am I. :D

But since neither one of us has one, my point is that there is just as much support for handling this in either fashion. The official must do what he believes is best at that particular time in that specific situation.

If you really want to be that stubborn, assume that a circuit breaker for the lights trips but the scoreboard is still on. Are you suggesting that play should continue in the dark since nothing in 6-7 says to stop the clock if the lights go out? ;)

I have, on both accounts. I've seen the net so well hooked that it made it impossible for the ball to go through....not just possibly affect it.

What are you going to do when, eventually, that ball springs off the net like a trampoline on each of 2-3 trys by the team. The coach is going to be legitimately furious that you didn't fix the net when it should have been fixed and his team is now without a deserved bucket.

I've posted a rule that specifies how the net is supposed to be. I've seen nothing providing a counter to that.

I supplied a rule. Have you got a rules citation saying something different?

If the FED wanted officials to stop play every time a net hung up, it would be listed to do so in rule 6-7. It isn't.

LOL! Exactly. That's all you have. The net has not been removed. It's still suspended from the ring, even if part of it is flipped up. You have nothing that says to stop the game and play with the net.

Congratulations! http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...s/confetti.gif

Oh, I get it. Applying that rule <B>all</b> the time, if a player just hits the net so that it moves sideways--the net doesn't get hung up on the rim at all- it just gets knocked sideways so that it is no longer suspended 15"-18" under the ring, that means that we're supposed to immediately blow our whistle and stop play, no matter where the ball is.

Yup, that makes a whole buncha sense.

You and Nevada can follow that one, Camron. I'll go by rule 6-7.

I did. You chose to ignore it.
So, your saying you'll keep playing under any condition that is not explicity listed in 6-7 such as:

• ball develops a leak and goes flat
• net get stuck across the rim (and you see a ball bounce off of it)
• backboard padding becomes dislodged and falls to the floor under the basket
• the rim breaks
• the backboard breaks
• Debris on the court,
• water on the court
• lights outf
• ire in the bleachers
• etc.

all since you have no explicit rule that tell you to stop the game.

If part of it is over the top, how can the net be below the ring??? The definition of suspended is hanging, not laying on top. This is not quantum physics, the net (all of it) is either below the rim or it is not. If the net is not below the rim, it should be.

No one has yet address my question of a breakaway rim not returning to it's normal position after a dunk...one around here did that for a while until the school replaced it. Are you maintaining that since no rule says to fix it, that you'll play with the heavily tilted rim until the next natural whistle? Tough luck for the team that has to shoot at it unless they want to burn a timeout????

I can't believe you'd not stop the game to fix the rim and if you do stop the game, what rule are you using to do so? You can't do so and remain consistent with the net issue. If you fix one, you have to fix the other for the same reason.

Um, no, I certainly did respond to your citation of rule 1-10-1. For some unknown reason you're ignoring my response. I'm still waiting for you to respond to my question.

Again, using your logic, are you going to stop the game <b>every</b> time the net is hit by a player so that it is no longer suspended vertically 15-18" below the ring? And if not, why not? Don't you believe in the rule being applied equitably and consistently the entire game? Iow, do you advocate calling the rule only <b>some</b> of the time, not <b>all</b> of the time?

Btw, I'm sure if the FED hadda agreed with your interpretation of 1-10-1, it woulda found it's way into R6-7.

Actually, if this was earth-shakingly important enough to argue about (again) for four pages, it would be in the book.

Actually, if you don't care, why post?:confused:

Hey, just an observation. It seems that this one gets obsessed and argued about a lot. I remember going around in circles with this one before, and never coming to a definitive answer. Besides, maybe I'm reeeeaaaallllly bored.:)

It doesn't say anything about "vertical". My contention is that if it is over the top of the ring, it is not beneath the ring. That is all.

How can you be so sure? I seem to recall other cases where you and/or others were so sure that were later clarified to be the opposite. 6-7 is not an exhaustive list of reasons to stop the clock...just the common reasons.


Check out 7-8...
Timeout occurs and the clock, if running, shall be stopped when and official:
Art. 2....Stops play:
d. For any other situations or an emergency.

There it is....a rule that gives me authority to stop the clock and fix the net.

It says "suspended". The net is still <b>suspended</b> from the ring even if the bottom part of the net is over the top, isn't it?

What's your reason again?:confused:

No, it's not suspeneded from the ring if it is laying over the top.

This happened twice in a recent game. Both times there was a whistle from the old trail/new lead [otherwise known as my unpatched partner] after made baskets. My approach is to fix it the next time there is a dead ball at that end. I don't blow a whistle when a kid has his shirt untucked or his mouthguard out, I take care of it at the next dead ball. I put the netting slightly out of kilter in the same category with the exception that I am not marching down to the other end to fix it at the next dead ball.

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

I'm not making anything out of it, Jeff. I'm just telling you my understanding of the publications that NASO sells. IAABO also simply copies the NFHS rule and case books, using explicit approval from the FED. IAABO however sells their own mechanics manual too, which apparently has some differences in it from the FED Manual. NASO publications would basically be the same. Both NASO and IAABO have issued rulings, info, etc. before that were wrong, as per NFHS publications.

If there's an NFHS logo on the cover of the book, whatever is in the book is approved by the NFHS. If there isn't an NFHS logo on the book, it isn't approved by the NFHS. The info in a NASO or IAABO publication without an NFHS logo on the cover therefore <b>might</b> be correct, but there is no guarantee that it <b>is</b> correct. That's all I'm saying.

Let us relax for a minute. I was not being critical of you personally or your position. If you have not seen the Guidebook you would not know what is on it. It would be hard to know for sure. But we have talked about this before. For the record at the top of each publication (or on the front page) there is a caption that says and I quote, "Official Publication of the NFHS." This is also on this year's publication and other sports publications (football to be exact). Also many of the content are not directly about rules or POEs as I stated. They have things like "Quick Tips" which reiterate things that are already in other publications like mechanics or even the concept of refereeing the defense and offense. There is even a tip about putting an extra uniform in your bag. I will still have to do some looking to see where this was discussed and what year, but this year's publication which I am currently looking at is in the same vane of other year's publications. But most of the information is about the new rules or POEs of the current year.

Peace

#1) I am relaxed. If I got any more relaxed, I'd be asleep. :)

#2) I think that we're basically saying the same thing. If it's got an NFHS logo or the caption somewhere, then it comes from or it's approved by the FED. That's the only point I was trying to get across from the git-go.

That comment was for more than just you. I kind of think my response as a little stronger than I intended. :D

I hear you. The NF and Referee Logo are all over the guide. But on the front page it is clear the NF is at the forefront. We are definitely on the same page.

Peace