The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 31, 2000, 03:10pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 12
Question

I was wearing my coach's hat yesterday, and had this happen in our game:

First quareter, we(white)are inbounding in front of our bench. Black team player reaches across the plane and hits the ball while it is still in inbounders hand. Official blows his whistle, says "Black, you can't reach across the plane". I know that since black touched the ball, the correct call is a technical foul, but I'm not going to force the issue. As the official is restarting the throw in, I ask "Is that an official warning?" He sort of rolls his eyes and replies, "yes, that is an official warning".

Closing seconds of the first half. We are inbounding from sideline, the other official administering. Same thing happens--black reaches across and hits the ball. Official stops play, warns Black not to reach across. At this point I am yelling to administering official that this is the second time, it has to be a T (never mind that by the rules it should have been a T each time it happened because the ball was touched). He ignores me, so I turn my attention to his partner across the floor. He too ignores me.

Time runs out, and before the officials leave the floor I ask official #2 why he didn't call the T. He conferences with official #1 and then says that he didn't know it was the second time black did that. I then ask #1 why, when he saw #2 call it, didn't he come in and get things right. No answer.

Here's my question. Since a coach is allowed to go to the table and request the horn be buzzed to prevent a correctable error from being committed, could I have gone to the table after the second instance of black reaching through the plane? If merited free throws are not awarded, it is a correctable error. In this case, each official warned black for the same infraction, when by rule it should have been a technical foul on the second instance of the infraction. Two free throws come as part of the technical foul, so merited free throws were not awarded because the officials weren't communicating.

Not a typical case, but does this fit under correctable error provisions?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 31, 2000, 03:38pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 17
Send a message via ICQ to Lee Jones
Post

The only way that you could have gotten shots for a T in this situation would have been if you could have gotten the 1st official to tell the 2nd official BEFORE THE BALL WAS NEXT PUT INTO PLAY that a warning had been issued. The reason that the standard live ball, dead ball, live ball criteria does not apply is that the original official did not have the scorer record the 1st warning in the book, thus there is no record of it ever happening.

quote:
Originally posted by mrsref on 01-31-2000 02:10 PM
I was wearing my coach's hat yesterday, and had this happen in our game:

First quareter, we(white)are inbounding in front of our bench. Black team player reaches across the plane and hits the ball while it is still in inbounders hand. Official blows his whistle, says "Black, you can't reach across the plane". I know that since black touched the ball, the correct call is a technical foul, but I'm not going to force the issue. As the official is restarting the throw in, I ask "Is that an official warning?" He sort of rolls his eyes and replies, "yes, that is an official warning".

Closing seconds of the first half. We are inbounding from sideline, the other official administering. Same thing happens--black reaches across and hits the ball. Official stops play, warns Black not to reach across. At this point I am yelling to administering official that this is the second time, it has to be a T (never mind that by the rules it should have been a T each time it happened because the ball was touched). He ignores me, so I turn my attention to his partner across the floor. He too ignores me.

Time runs out, and before the officials leave the floor I ask official #2 why he didn't call the T. He conferences with official #1 and then says that he didn't know it was the second time black did that. I then ask #1 why, when he saw #2 call it, didn't he come in and get things right. No answer.

Here's my question. Since a coach is allowed to go to the table and request the horn be buzzed to prevent a correctable error from being committed, could I have gone to the table after the second instance of black reaching through the plane? If merited free throws are not awarded, it is a correctable error. In this case, each official warned black for the same infraction, when by rule it should have been a technical foul on the second instance of the infraction. Two free throws come as part of the technical foul, so merited free throws were not awarded because the officials weren't communicating.

Not a typical case, but does this fit under correctable error provisions?


Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 31, 2000, 03:54pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,015
Post

I think it was a correctable error and the free-throws should have been shot (assuming it was detected in time).

I am curious as to why the coach let the infraction go the first time, but wanted it enforced the second.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 31, 2000, 04:17pm
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 171
Send a message via AIM to Bradley Batt
Post

This is not a correctable error situation under the definition in the NFHS rulebook.

The difference that it makes is that you would have to get the officials to acknowledge their error before the ball was put into play. In a correctable error situation the statute of limitations is the "first dead ball after the clock has properly started."

Of course, we all know that you should report a throw-in plane violation to the table. Although generally they have no idea what to do when you report it
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 31, 2000, 04:33pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 378
Post

It is also not a correctable error situation because, since no T was called, no free-throws were merited. In other words, the officials, right or wrong, did not deem the situation worthy of a technical and did not call one. For the coach to go to the table and ask that a correctable error be rectified means that he wants the refs to call the T that they passed on. But a "should have" foul (in this case, a T) is not correctable. The refs as described in this situation were remiss in their duties, especially the second time around, but the game must go on nonetheless. It is not a correctable situation. (Also, if this was a 5th or 6th grade game, I might be more lenient on the touching the ball issue anyway, prefering to use it--even the second time--as a teaching situation. Maybe THEN, if it continued, I'd call a T, and then again explain to the player why I did so.)
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 31, 2000, 06:32pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 23
Red face

This is a case of the zebras not having the backbone to call the game the way it is suposed to be called. They didnt have the backbone to call the T ro else just didnt care enough to record the warning properly. This is common in lower level games. However when confronted with their obvious mistake they should have then done the right thing. People sometimes think that enforcing these rules at younger levels is complicating the game, they are the same ones who also ask why the older kids dont know better than to do stuff like this.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Mon Jan 31, 2000, 11:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 120
Post

The error was not recording the 'official warning' in the scorebook at the first instance.
However, even if it was recorded, and the second violation occurred, not to shoot fouls for a technical is not correctable, unless the technical foul is called and the shots are not taken.

We now have the procedure for warnings idelibly printed into the rulebook, so there is no reason not to log it when the warning occurs.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:33pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1