Basket interference, T or nothing?
 

Had this play the other day. Need some advise.:confused:

A1 on a fast break, goes up for a dunk but loses the ball near the top of his dunking action above the height of the rim but outside the plane of the rim. He brings his hand forward anyway like he was going to dunk the ball and grasps the rim breifly enough to pull it down a few inches. When this happened the ball is slightly behind A1's hand but not in the plane of the rim. Then after A1 lets loose of the rim, the ball catches up to A1 and it goes through the basket.

Do you have BI thus no basket (but the ball was never in the plane nor on the rim while A1 was touching the rim), a T (for grasping the rim, so no basket)or nothing and count the goal?

There is no basket interference, as per case book play 9.11.4. Count the basket. Call the "T" on A1 for grasping the ring, unless he did so to prevent injury.

I don't believe a T is warranted in this situation. Play on! The player may have lost the grip of the ball when he started to bring it down for the dunk.

Unless you call a techincal for violating 10-3-4 every time a player trying for goal by successfully dunking the ball grasps the rim as a part of the normal dunking motion, causing it to be pulled down between 1 and 4 inches (which, in my experience, happens about 98% of the time on a dunk), I don't advocate calling a technical for violating 10-3-4 when the try by dunking is unsuccessful, as in the OP. And I'm going to go ahead and guess that I'd be laughed out of the gym for calling this in front of my assignors/evaluators - and not in a funny way.

My call: Ball not in the cylinder = no-call.

I had a similar play but A1's shot didn't go in, he back-rimmed the dunk, grabbed the rim and looked down, A2 grabbed the rebound and shot and A1 let go of the rim with the ball in the cylinder on A2's put back.

What do you have on that one?;)

Depends. Did the movable ring get pulled down during this action, and was the ball within the cylinder at that that time?

Edited to include: Please disregard this question - I don't know what I was thinking.

Sigh....

Whatintheheck does a player grasping the rim after dunking the ball have to do with this play?:confused: In the play being discussed, the player grabbed the rim during a <b>loose ball</b>! The player lost control of the ball <b>BEFORE</b> dunking it. There was <b>NO</b> dunk!!! What happened with the ball <b>after</b> the player lost control of it is completely irrelevant as long as the player didn't touch the ball while it was in the cylinder, or touch the basket while the ball was on or within the basket. And the player didn't do either of those acts, as was specifically written in the original post.

And if your assignors/evaluators don't agree with my ruling and want to laugh about it, tell them it might be a good idea to borrow a case book from somebody and read case book play 10.3.4SitB(b) before busting out laughing. This case play is almost exactly the same as the original post. In both situations, a player grabbed the ring, but let go of it before the ball was on the ring or in the basket. Therefore, by rules 9-11 & 4-6, there was <b>no</b> BI. Then, specifically ask them to read the sentence in the RULING of the case play cited above that says <i>"A1's grasping is not penalized if it is judged there was a possibility of injury had he/she <b>not</b> grasped the basket."</i> Iow, it <b>is</b> a technical foul if the ring is grasped when there is <b>no</b> chance of injury.

Your call is wrong.

Um, yeah, that's exactly what the original post stated also. The player lost his gip on the ball and it came loose. It's also completely irrelevant as to whether or not a technical foul is called. It's a "T" if the player grasps the ring, and does so without trying to avoid an injury. That's the <b>only</b> criteria used in this play to determine whether a "T" should be called or not.

A1 attempted a dunk, missed, grabbed the rim, rim did what a break-away rim should and came down, A2 grabbed the rebound and shot, ball was in the cylinder when A1 let go of the rim...but the rim being pulled down has nothing to do with the BI call, A1 can be touching the rim, net or ball in this situation and the call is the same.;)

10.3.4.b is not describing an attempted dunk, (let alone one that seemingly involves the shooter losing the ball on the downward stuffing motion of an attempted dunk - just outside the ring). The techincal foul being assessed in situations where the player is not "grasping to avoid injury" do not involve a normal dunking motion/situation/follow-through (whereby the ring is usually grasped/pulled down).

The reason I included the analogy of a player dunking the ball and pulling down the ring as a normal part of the dunking motion is because, by going by the last sentence of 10.3.4.b, this would be a techincal foul. I, however, I do not think it applies.

Cool....but you're the one that tried to introduce a dunk when there wasn't one involved. Case book play 10.3.4(b) is close to the play described in the original post. That case play does not reference a dunk in any way. The original play did not involve a dunk either. Pulling the ring down during a dunk was never germane or relevant to the proper ruling. Soooo...please justify your "no call" ruling above for a player grasping the ring during a loose ball, if there's no chance of an injury involving the player. I said it was a technical foul and you basically said that your assignors/evaluators would laugh at me if I made that call. Please give me a rules citation that will justify their laughter.

Btw, what's your answers on Blind Zebra's questions?

The OP by kycat1 involves an attempted dunk.

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

Sooooo....answers now?

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

Edited to include: Again, I don't know what I was thinking - change the red text to "no call."

Same as before.

And incidentally, I said my assignors/evaluators would laugh me out of the gym, not you. I'm sure you'd be able to scare them into nodding in agreement.:D

Basket interference? For grabbing the ring while the ball was in the <b>cylinder</b>? 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.:rolleyes:

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.

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)???

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

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 <b>before</b> 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.

How can a player be <font color = blue> attempting to force a ball through the basket with his hand(s)</font> when he doesn't <b>have</b> 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?

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?

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

For the <b>last</b> time, you cannot have a dunk attempt <b>without</b> a ball. In the original post, the shooter lost the ball <b>before</b> 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.

LOL @ Dan_ref. Turnabout is fair play!! :D