The Official Forum - A Play I can not find in rules or case... Actually happened.

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - A Play I can not find in rules or case... Actually happened. (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/3318-play-i-can-not-find-rules-case-actually-happened.html)

I emailed referee magazine also..

I send this to refereee magazine also to see if they have a reply.

Re: I don't really think so

Quote:

Originally posted by Self
That is not one of the 3 warnings that are covered by the rules. 10-1-5B covers delay but it is used after timeouts or for free throws. It also would result in a Technical.

Right -- it's not one of the three official / required warnings.

But, we give "warnings" for other items all the time -- "Coach, I need to to stay in your box." "Coach, that's enough." "Hands off." "Move out of the lane."

and, ...

"Be sure to go out of bounds on the throw-in, or it will be a delay T."

(Of course, your wording may differ.)

Re: Re: I don't really think so

Quote:

Originally posted by bob jenkins

But, we give "warnings" for other items all the time -- "Coach, I need to to stay in your box."

(Of course, your wording may differ.)

I agree that our wording may differ, but I don't ever recall desiring to stay in the coaches box. I prefer to get away from that area. ;)

Think you are making too much of a simple call. It's a throw in violation. Blow whistle as soon as players start down the court.
Thrower has to be behind the line to be legal. That's all you need to tell coach.

Why are there officials still insisting to reset the throw-in and then issuing a delay of game warning. I am not going to debate at this point whether reseting the throw-in is correct or not, BUT, in the NFHS Rules there are only three delay of game warning situations and this play is not one of them. What did the team do to get a delay of game warning. The team cannot even be T'ed for causing a delay in the ball becoming alive. So forget this delay of game warning horse manure. It does NOT belong in this play.

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Why are there officials still insisting to reset the throw-in and then issuing a delay of game warning. I am not going to debate at this point whether reseting the throw-in is correct or not, BUT, in the NFHS Rules there are only three delay of game warning situations and this play is not one of them. What did the team do to get a delay of game warning. The team cannot even be T'ed for causing a delay in the ball becoming alive. So forget this delay of game warning horse manure. It does NOT belong in this play.

Because that's what I've been told to do.

Mark, there is no right answer in this case. It's not addressed in the rule book or case book.

But I beg to differ that the ball is live. By definition, it may be. But there's absolutely nothing that can be legally done with the ball when it's at the other end of the court and hasn't been inbounded properly.

As for those of us in NC, Dick Knox has instructed us to stop the silliness and issue a delay of game warning. And that's what we'll do until the NF addresses this situation.

BTW, you're so big on telling us why we're all wrong, why don't you tell us the proper way to handle it?

Quote:

Originally posted by donfowler
Think you are making too much of a simple call. It's a throw in violation. Blow whistle as soon as players start down the court.
Thrower has to be behind the line to be legal. That's all you need to tell coach.

Let's hold on a second here Don. The player has 5 seconds
to get OOB behind the endline & throw the ball in. There is
no rule that supports a violation until those 5 seconds have
elapsed. The problem is that in those 5 seconds anything
can happen, including a basket or a quick steal & basket.
You have got to do something to fix this sitch immediately
or just let it go. I choose to blow the ball dead & get
the throw-in done right. There is nothing in the rules or
case book supporting this, but Tony does claim to have a
NC state interpretation. That's good for Tony but I'm in
NY, not NC.

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref
The problem is that in those 5 seconds anything
can happen, including a basket or a quick steal & basket.
You have got to do something to fix this sitch immediately
or just let it go. I choose to blow the ball dead & get
the throw-in done right. There is nothing in the rules or
case book supporting this, but Tony does claim to have a
NC state interpretation.

I agree with Dan. This is definitely not a throw-in violation. If we didn't have an official interpretation from the NCHSAA office, I would give a little whistle and do it right.

Quote:

That's good for Tony but I'm in NY, not NC.

I hope things look up for you soon! ;)

The ANSWER FROM IAABO .....

The below answer is the answer I received from IAABO when I emailed them.....

Answer #4 on your e-mail is correct. It is a throw-in violation except the ball is not at B-1'disposal until the official actually starts counting. But with this play situation it is not relevant. Because B-1 did not step out of bounds as the rule states, is precisely why it is a throw-in violation. This is a throw-in violation not a technical foul initially. It is the responsibility of the team that has been scored upon to make a bona fide attempt to get the ball and go directly and immediately out of bounds without undue delay and release the ball within 5 seconds on a pass directly into the court so it touches or touched by a player inbounds or out of bounds. This is basic and fundamental to the throw-in rule. When B-1 failed
to take the ball out of bounds, B-1 violated this basic and fundamental rule. Rule 7 Section 6 Art 1; Rule 9 Section 2 Art 2 cover the rule interpretation. It would be considered good officiating technique for the official after this occurred to issue a warning that if the team persist in such tactics a technical foul would be assessed.

Hope this clears up the situation for you.

Re: The ANSWER FROM IAABO .....

Quote:

Originally posted by Self
The below answer is the answer I received from IAABO when I emailed them.....
Hope this clears up the situation for you.

Thanks, it does. If the IAABO says it's a throw-in violation, then I know that it's a delay of game warning! :D

bktball ref-this is one situation that we are finally on the same page. mark, your in rome, we are the romans, do as we do! (note the sarcasm on the rome thing)

Re: The ANSWER FROM IAABO .....

Quote:

Originally posted by Self
The below answer is the answer I received from IAABO when I emailed them.....

Answer #4 on your e-mail is correct. It is a throw-in violation except the ball is not at B-1'disposal until the official actually starts counting. But with this play situation it is not relevant. Because B-1 did not step out of bounds as the rule states, is precisely why it is a throw-in violation. This is a throw-in violation not a technical foul initially. It is the responsibility of the team that has been scored upon to make a bona fide attempt to get the ball and go directly and immediately out of bounds without undue delay and release the ball within 5 seconds on a pass directly into the court so it touches or touched by a player inbounds or out of bounds. This is basic and fundamental to the throw-in rule. When B-1 failed
to take the ball out of bounds, B-1 violated this basic and fundamental rule. Rule 7 Section 6 Art 1; Rule 9 Section 2 Art 2 cover the rule interpretation. It would be considered good officiating technique for the official after this occurred to issue a warning that if the team persist in such tactics a technical foul would be assessed.

Hope this clears up the situation for you.

Crew,just to clear something up for you.Rulings from IAABO are not approved rulings.Approved rulings have to come from Fed(NFHS),who issue the rules,or from the state representatives of the NFHS(such as BBRef's case).IAABO is a separate organization for basketball officials that use NFHS rules.IAABO has no power to issue or amend rules.Rulings from IAABO may be 100% correct,or may also be wrong by Fed interpretation.I believe that some states do use IAABO boards as their licensing bodies,but they certainly do not cover all areas.I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

Re: Re: The ANSWER FROM IAABO .....

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Originally posted by Self
The below answer is the answer I received from IAABO when I emailed them.....

Answer #4 on your e-mail is correct. It is a throw-in violation except the ball is not at B-1'disposal until the official actually starts counting. But with this play situation it is not relevant. Because B-1 did not step out of bounds as the rule states, is precisely why it is a throw-in violation. This is a throw-in violation not a technical foul initially. It is the responsibility of the team that has been scored upon to make a bona fide attempt to get the ball and go directly and immediately out of bounds without undue delay and release the ball within 5 seconds on a pass directly into the court so it touches or touched by a player inbounds or out of bounds. This is basic and fundamental to the throw-in rule. When B-1 failed
to take the ball out of bounds, B-1 violated this basic and fundamental rule. Rule 7 Section 6 Art 1; Rule 9 Section 2 Art 2 cover the rule interpretation. It would be considered good officiating technique for the official after this occurred to issue a warning that if the team persist in such tactics a technical foul would be assessed.

Hope this clears up the situation for you.

Crew,just to clear something up for you.Rulings from IAABO are not approved rulings.Approved rulings have to come from Fed(NFHS),who issue the rules,or from the state representatives of the NFHS(such as BBRef's case).IAABO is a separate organization for basketball officials that use NFHS rules.IAABO has no power to issue or amend rules.Rulings from IAABO may be 100% correct,or may also be wrong by Fed interpretation.I believe that some states do use IAABO boards as their licensing bodies,but they certainly do not cover all areas.I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

Let me correct a perception about IAABO. IAABO uses only NFHS or NCAA interpretations. Its philosophy is one rule, one interpretation. An interpretation from an IAABO interpreter is one that has been carefully researched and based upon NFHS or NCAA interpretations. IAABO has members that sit on the NFHS Rules Committee and works closely with the NFHS on rules and mechanics.

Regarding the orginal posted play. This is a throw-in violation based on Answer #4 above. And I will continue to REPEAT MYSELF (sorry Mr. Knox, you are wrong on this point), this is not a delay of game warning situation, nor is it ever a technical foul for delay of game. Whenever the situation in the original posted play occurs a throw-in violation has occured. Just blow the whistle and go the other way. Case closed. Easy play. No muss, no fuss. After a few times the offended team is going to get the point and take more care in how it inbounds the ball after its opponent scores.

And yes I am a member of IAABO (member: Visualization and Education Committee).

[QUOTE]Originally posted by BktBallRef

Quote:

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Quote:

That's good for Tony but I'm in NY, not NC.

I hope things look up for you soon! ;)

Ha. Ha. Ha. Ha. Very funny. :p

Re: Re: Re: The ANSWER FROM IAABO .....

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Quote:

Originally posted by Self
The below answer is the answer I received from IAABO when I emailed them.....

Answer #4 on your e-mail is correct. It is a throw-in violation except the ball is not at B-1'disposal until the official actually starts counting. But with this play situation it is not relevant. Because B-1 did not step out of bounds as the rule states, is precisely why it is a throw-in violation. This is a throw-in violation not a technical foul initially. It is the responsibility of the team that has been scored upon to make a bona fide attempt to get the ball and go directly and immediately out of bounds without undue delay and release the ball within 5 seconds on a pass directly into the court so it touches or touched by a player inbounds or out of bounds. This is basic and fundamental to the throw-in rule. When B-1 failed
to take the ball out of bounds, B-1 violated this basic and fundamental rule. Rule 7 Section 6 Art 1; Rule 9 Section 2 Art 2 cover the rule interpretation. It would be considered good officiating technique for the official after this occurred to issue a warning that if the team persist in such tactics a technical foul would be assessed.

Hope this clears up the situation for you.

Crew,just to clear something up for you.Rulings from IAABO are not approved rulings.Approved rulings have to come from Fed(NFHS),who issue the rules,or from the state representatives of the NFHS(such as BBRef's case).IAABO is a separate organization for basketball officials that use NFHS rules.IAABO has no power to issue or amend rules.Rulings from IAABO may be 100% correct,or may also be wrong by Fed interpretation.I believe that some states do use IAABO boards as their licensing bodies,but they certainly do not cover all areas.I'm sure someone will correct me if I am wrong.

Let me correct a perception about IAABO. IAABO uses only NFHS or NCAA interpretations. Its philosophy is one rule, one interpretation. An interpretation from an IAABO interpreter is one that has been carefully researched and based upon NFHS or NCAA interpretations. IAABO has members that sit on the NFHS Rules Committee and works closely with the NFHS on rules and mechanics.

Regarding the orginal posted play. This is a throw-in violation based on Answer #4 above. And I will continue to REPEAT MYSELF (sorry Mr. Knox, you are wrong on this point), this is not a delay of game warning situation, nor is it ever a technical foul for delay of game. Whenever the situation in the original posted play occurs a throw-in violation has occured. Just blow the whistle and go the other way. Case closed. Easy play. No muss, no fuss. After a few times the offended team is going to get the point and take more care in how it inbounds the ball after its opponent scores.

And yes I am a member of IAABO (member: Visualization and Education Committee).

So,we have a sitch here where the Fed and IAABO have issued conflicting interpretations.As Mr. Knox is a member of the Fed rules committee,try to guess where Tony's butt is if he doesn't follow the Fed interpretation,whether he agrees with it or not.