Basket interference, T or nothing?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

Basket interference. Why, do you have a technical foul for grabbing the rim while not attempting to avoid injury?

Basket interference? For grabbing the ring while the ball was in the cylinder? Are you serious?

Methinks you need to go over the definition of basket interference. Please read NFHS rule 4-6. It is not, and never has been, basket interference if a player grabs the ring while the ball is in the cylinder.

That's a pretty basic rule not to know.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The OP said that dunker LOST control of the ball BEFORE the dunk. There was NEVER a dunk in the original post. There was a loose ball when the player grabbed the ring.

Sooooo....answers now?

So, a player going for a layup that has the ball slip off his hand at the last 2nd was never really shooting?

The player was attempting to dunk. At some point in EVERY dunk attempt, the ball comes off the shooter's hand and becomes a loose ball. Most times, it continues down through the net or bounces off the back of the rim. Whether the separation between the hand and the ball occurs as the hand contacts the rim or 0.05 seconds before is not important. It is still a dunk attempt.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The OP said that dunker LOST control of the ball BEFORE the dunk. There was NEVER a dunk in the original post. There was a loose ball when the player grabbed the ring.

Indulge me:
A1 attempts to dunk the ball. While the ball is still in A1's hand, on its downward dunking motion, and still just completely outside the cylinder, B1 cleanly strips the ball from A1. A1's hand that just had the ball outside the cylinder, still moving in a downward, normal-speed dunking motion, contacts and brings down the moveable ring of the basket on the follow-through.

Jurassic's call: Technical foul for violation of 10-3-4 (and not meeting the requirement of the 10-3-4-Exception)???

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Basket interference? For grabbing the ring while the ball was in the cylinder? Are you serious?

Methinks you need to go over the definition of basket interference. Please read NFHS rule 4-6. It is not, and never has been, basket interference if a player grabs the ring while the ball is in the cylinder.

That's a pretty basic rule not to know.

I agree. I don't know what I was thinking, as my edits to those posts now say.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, a player going for a layup that has the ball slip off his hand at the last 2nd was never really shooting?

The player might be in the act of shooting, but he sureasheck isn't able to meet the definition of a "dunk" as in rule 4-16. At no time in the original post, was the player driving, forcing, pushing or attempting to force a ball through the basket with his hand(s). The player lost control of the ball before any of those acts according to the description in the OP.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The player might be in the act of shooting, but he sureasheck isn't able to meet the definition of a "dunk" as in rule 4-16. At no time in the original post, was the player driving, forcing, pushing or attempting to force a ball through the basket with his hand(s). The player lost control of the ball before any of those acts according to the description in the OP.

I disagree. The player in the OP and the last question I asked you was doing exactly this.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

I disagree. The player in the OP and the last question I asked you was doing exactly this.

How can a player be attempting to force a ball through the basket with his hand(s) when he doesn't have a ball?

'Splain that one to me, Batman.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

How can a player be attempting to force a ball through the basket with his hand(s) when he doesn't have a ball?

'Splain that one to me, Batman.

The situation is this:

A player attempting to dunk, ball in hand, at a specific point in time -- who then no longer has the ball, but is now at the basket, a split-second later.

You assert that the grabbing of the rim associated with a normal dunking motion - that begins with a dunking attempt - and follow-through in this split-second later is a separate and punishable act in violation of 10-3-4.

I assert that this grabbing is not a separate act.

We simply disagree.

So is what I posted in post #18 accurate, as far as your ruling in that situation?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

You assert that the grabbing of the rim associated with a normal dunking motion - that begins with a dunking attempt - and follow-through in this split-second later is a separate and punishable act in violation of 10-3-4.

No, I don't assert that at all. I assert that a player grasped the ring during a loose ball. At no time was there a dunk or a dunk attempt, as defined in rule 4-16. If the grasping wasn't done to prevent injury, then it's a technical foul. I base that on rule 10-3-4 and case book play 10.3.4(b).

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

No, I don't assert that at all. I assert that a player grasped the ring during a loose ball. At no time was there a dunk or a dunk attempt, as defined in rule 4-16. If the grasping wasn't done to prevent injury, then it's a technical foul. I base that on rule 10-3-4 and case book play 10.3.4(b).

Do I really need to quote the OP and bold and highlight all the times "dunk" appears again? Wow.

Question 1) How would you describe the situation you still haven't answered my question about to another official who didn't see it? If you say that you'd describe that situation without using the words I've bolded in the following sentence, then I'd like you to type out what you'd actually say. --"A1 was trying/attempting or went up to dunk the ball, was right at the basket, and B1 came over and just took the ball cleanly away."

Question 2) If the player is not attempting to dunk the ball, then what exactly do you think is happening there?

You're essentially eliminating the word "attempt" in citing the rule for your argument's sake, without actually ommitting the word from your citation.

Question 3) By your reasoning, a dunk attempt only occurs...when? When a dunk is successful?

Seems odd that the word "attempt" is in the definition, then. If that were the intent of the rule, the word "attempt" would not appear in the definition.

Question 4) Is my assumption about your call correct in the situation I gave earlier?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

By your reasoning, a dunk attempt only occurs...when?

Read NFHS rule 4-16. It says "dunking or stuffing is the driving, forcing, pushing or attempting to force a BALL through the basket with the hand(s)".

For the last time, you cannot have a dunk attempt without a ball. In the original post, the shooter lost the ball before he started to push or force the ball down.

[Dan_ref]

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Read NFHS rule 4-16. It says "dunking or stuffing is the driving, forcing, pushing or attempting to force a BALL through the basket with the hand(s)".

For the last time, you cannot have a dunk attempt without a ball. In the original post, the shooter lost the ball before he started to push or force the ball down.

Jurassic - What you're advocating makes as much sense as calling a technical foul for a defensive player slapping the backboard during a legitimate block attempt.

And I'm out.

[Scrapper1]

LOL @ Dan_ref. Turnabout is fair play!!