Unusual Strategy Involving the 10 Second Count

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by mplagrow

Step one. Warn the coach that he's making a travesty of the game and causing a stop in action.

Step two. Call the T if play didn't pick up after step one.

Step three. Forfeit if step two didn't result in picking up the pace.

I doubt you need to go past step one. BTW, since this was the championship game, was the first place team really that much better than the second place team?

Copycat.

[Texas Aggie]

10-1-5 applies to dead ball situations and those where a team tries to keep the ball from becoming live or put into play (see case book last play on 10-1-5). The lack of action rule has not been in place since the very early '90s. Assuming you do not have any sort of backcourt or throw in violation (and you don't), this would be a legal play. It isn't subject to the travesty rule as it isn't a travesty.

The problem here is that additional, non-Fed rules, are in place. This situation would never happen in any regular Fed games that don't play with "extra" rules. Since under normal fed rules, the defense has the ability to go get the ball, what if they decide they won't do it?

[BillyMac]

Please see Rule 10-5 and note the words "similar acts". I'm not sure, but the situation described in this thread may fall into the category of being a "similiar act" resulting in an "actionless contest". The thread would only occur in a real game with revised rules, in this case not allowing a press, however, a similar question was asked on an IAABO refresher exam a few years ago. Maybe one of our Forum members can recall the situation, the question and the answer from that exam.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Texas Aggie

10-1-5 applies to dead ball situations and those where a team tries to keep the ball from becoming live or put into play (see case book last play on 10-1-5). The lack of action rule has not been in place since the very early '90s. Assuming you do not have any sort of backcourt or throw in violation (and you don't), this would be a legal play. It isn't subject to the travesty rule as it isn't a travesty.

Allowing the ball to sit on the floor and refusing to play is certainly allowing the game to become an actionless contest. Since the no BC pressure is not a per Fed rules, there's absolutely no reason 10-1-5 can't be used in this situation. It's certainly a similiar act.

Leave the legalese at the officie, Aggie.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Allowing the ball to sit on the floor and refusing to play is certainly allowing the game to become an actionless contest.

So which team are you going to award the forfeit to, as all 10 players stand around?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

So which team are you going to award the forfeit to, as all 10 players stand around?

You might want to re-read the original post. That will give you your answer.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

You might want to re-read the original post. That will give you your answer.

Well, fine, if you want to be a stickler for things like facts.

How about if there's no rule about defense in the backcourt and the same thing happens?

[BktBallRef]

A totally different situation.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

How about if there's no rule about defense in the backcourt and the same thing happens?

We have had situations in our local rec league at the lower grade levels (3rd and 4th) where no back court guarding is allowed at any time where a team has a one or two point lead and gains control in their backcourt with less than 10 seconds to go in the game and their coach just yells at them to hold the ball and don't move.

I don't particularly like it when it happens (about once or twice a season total) but the alternative is to allow backcourt guarding at that level (at least at the end of a close game). We've tried that and it is more trouble than it's worth.

Just one of those things, I guess.

[mplagrow]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Copycat.

Hey, how are the rest of us supposed to get to 10,000 posts?

[MajorCord]

My partner and I stopped the game, brought the coaches together to talk about the situation. I explained to Team A coach that Team B coach was concerned about running up of the score (although they never show more than a 20 point lead on the scoreboard). Team A coach agreed to do everything he could to keep that from happening. We resumed the game and everything went fine until early in the 4th quarter and Team B coach threatened to employ his strategy again. Team A coach again reminded his team to "not take fast breaks, etc." At this point, I informed Team B coach that if he chose to employ his "new-found" strategy again, we (the officials) would declare the game over and award Team A the win (rightfully so). The game was finally completed with no further episodes. Seemed like the longest game of my life. In the end, I suppose we utilized the "actionless contest" rule that BKTBALLREF mentioned, though I didn't have the specific rule at hand at the time.

[bgtg19]

I have always wondered about the "actionless contest" rule. I officiated a varsity boys basketball game earlier this year in which A1 stood near the division line in his front court with somewhere between 2:00 and 2:30 left on the clock in the first quarter and Team B stayed back in its zone defense and both teams essentially let the quarter run out (while the fans of both teams booed) since A1 did not initiate play until 10 seconds was left in the quarter.

I suppose one distinction from the OP in this thread is that in my scenario both teams participated in the "actionless contest," whereas in the OP, one team could do nothing about it as only one team did not want to "play." However, the rule does not say anything about not permitting an actionless contest "unless both teams agree."

It's all so silly....

[GoodKolbeMan]

I've wondered about this situation as we have leagues with this type rule and I had coached my daughter in the past where this rule was in force.

When a team A inbounds the ball in their backcourt by A1 rolling it and it has not been touched yet by A2, to me that is a loose ball in Team B's frontcourt and they should be able to go after it, i.e. no team control. Now, I know all hell would break loose from Team A if I weren't to whistle and tell them to get back, but....

Hasn't yet happened and my kids are now too old for me to be coaching and tell them to go get it, nor have I whispered to a coach my interpretation and explaining 'no team control' during a throw in to a rec coach would be futile. Better left alone, I think...

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by GoodKolbeMan

I've wondered about this situation as we have leagues with this type rule and I had coached my daughter in the past where this rule was in force.

When a team A inbounds the ball in their backcourt by A1 rolling it and it has not been touched yet by A2, to me that is a loose ball in Team B's frontcourt and they should be able to go after it, i.e. no team control. Now, I know all hell would break loose from Team A if I weren't to whistle and tell them to get back, but....

Hasn't yet happened and my kids are now too old for me to be coaching and tell them to go get it, nor have I whispered to a coach my interpretation and explaining 'no team control' during a throw in to a rec coach would be futile. Better left alone, I think...

I guess it depends on the local rule, but if you can't (aren't allowed to) defend a "normal" inbounds pass (even though there's no team control), how can you defend / go after a "roll the ball" inbounds pass?

[GoodKolbeMan]

Guess I'm thinking that IF I was still coaching the little tykes with that type rule and 'knowing' rules somewhat better than the average rec coach, I'm thinking of a way to beat the 'no d in backcourt rule' if my kids really needed to get the ball back.