It doesn't have to be off for several minutes to be a problem. It just has to be off for one hard juke. You've already referenced the KU-Mizzou game. What happened there? The player continued playing without the shoe. Even one possession shoeless could be dangerous.

Nothing we do can prevent us from the possibility of being sued. Whether the suit prevails is another issue. You said it yourself - the <B>player</B> is the one that continued playing without the shoe. The officials didn't <B>force</B> them to play. To be considered negligent an official would have knowingly and purposely set aside a rule that precipitated a dangerous event. In this case, there is no rule that specifically states that an official must stop play immediately upon seeing a player without a shoe. So if a player is injured, the player assumes most, if not all, of the responsibility of the injury, not the official.

Injuries happen all the time in sports. Would you consider stopping the game before a player slides under an airborne shooter, just to prevent the possibility of an injury? There's a good chance that player could be injured, AND you're gonna call a foul on them?!? Oh, the indignities! Sue the refs!!

Sounds silly, doesn't it? Same as stopping the game for the shoe, because of the slight possibility the player might hurt themselves. If you stay within the rules, you will not have a problem.

I'm not advocating a stop at any cost. I am saying that you should stop the game during a dead ball and correct this situation. It is foolishness to continue through a dead ball with a situation like this.

Using what rule basis?

The ball might be dead, but you're also stopping the clock. This might give one team an unintended advantage. Maybe one team gets to set up a press on an inbounds pass that they would not have done otherwise. Maybe one team gets to sub for a winded player that otherwise would've stayed in the game. If the clock is already stopped, (foul, violation, before a free throw, etc.), I have no problem with letting the player get their shoe back on. But by you stopping the clock, you are doing something that is not necessarily supported by rule. Granted, maybe 9 times out of 10 it will not be a problem, but it's that 1 other time that will get you in trouble.

Should, eh ?
Foolishness, eh ?

Actually the Sherron Collins of Kansas lost the shoe, picked up the shoe and threw the shoe off the court toward his bench (he was well behind the play) and went and sprinted up the court and played defense. The officials did not stop play to let him put his shoe one. Now since you know so much, what rule are you using to justify your position?

Peace

Do you stop to have someone tie an untied shoe? I consider that very similar.

What about the ankle strap or other protective device momentarily comes loose? Would these not cause an injury possibility?

Peace

I saw that Zoochy. The kid stopped and asked the ref to stop play. The announcer said, "They may stop for you in high school, but this is college. Get moving."

So you don't have a problem allowing the game to continue through a dead ball with a potentially dangerous situation on the floor? You would not stop the game at a dead ball if you noticed a large wet spot on the floor?

I am going to chime in...

I have no problem letting the kid play momentarily with a shoe off. There is such a thing as a time out. If the coach wants the person in the game and fix the shoe they can call time out...

If that does not work they can force a turnover, foul, do something to stop the clock and get a substitute in

What's the big deal here?

1) No. It's not potentially dangerous <i>per se</i>. If it was really dangerous, you can take it to the bank that the NFHS rulesmakers would have already addressed it very specifically. They haven't.

2) Whatintheheck has that got to do with this topic?:confused: You're really reaching on that one, Eastshire. A long, long way! Apples and oranges.

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by Eastshire
I'm not advocating a stop at any cost. I am saying that you should stop the game during a dead ball and correct this situation. It is foolishness to continue through a dead ball with a situation like this.
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Oh, my !
I am not even going to attempt to understand how you arrived at those conclusions.
Likewise, I am not inclined to pontificate what the members of this forum should do or should not do, nor am I likely to suggest that any of their actions, mechanics or judgements are foolish.

We'll have to disagree then on whether it's dangerous. As someone who has fallen down stairs due to wearing socks, I will continue to maintain that moving at any rate of speed in socks can be dangerous.

It's not apples to oranges if both are dangerous. However, since you do not find running in socks to be dangerous, I will conceed that the comparison doesn't work for you.

An odd statement, here. What are we doing on a BB if not discussing how situation should be handled?

OK, I think we're moving towards some agreement here...does anybody have a problem with this:

If a player loses both his shoes while playing basketball in a stairwell then we should stop the game at the first opportunity.

Hands for yes...??