A few situations/questions

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Rules reference, please?

Why did you even ask?

Peace

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Y2Koach

by the way, whenever possible, any references to where to look in the rulebook would be highly appreciated. thanks

The NFHS has a conflict in its rulings on the first play. Both of these case plays appear in the 2006-07 Case Book. So you have to take your pick until the Federation decides to clarify. Personally, I would award two points if the touch took place after the ball had fallen below the level of the ring, but three if the touch took place while the ball was on the way up or still above the ring level.

4.41.4 SITUATION B: A1's three-point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a) A2; or (b) B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. RULING: The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1)

5.2.1 SITUATION C: A1 throws the ball from behind the three-point line. The ball is legally touched by: (a) B1 who is in the three-point area; (b) B1 who is in the two-point area; (c) A2 who is in the three-point area; or (d) A2 who is in the two-point area. The ball continues in flight and goes through A's basket. RULING: In (a) and (b), three points are scored since the legal touching was by the defense and the ball was thrown from behind the three-point line. In (c), score three points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred behind the three-point line. In (d), score two points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred in the two-point area.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS has a conflict in its rulings on the first play. Both of these case plays appear in the 2006-07 Case Book. So you have to take your pick until the Federation decides to clarify. Personally, I would award two points if the touch took place after the ball had fallen below the level of the ring, but three if the touch took place while the ball was on the way up or still above the ring level.

4.41.4 SITUATION B: A1's three-point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a) A2; or (b) B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. RULING: The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1)

5.2.1 SITUATION C: A1 throws the ball from behind the three-point line. The ball is legally touched by: (a) B1 who is in the three-point area; (b) B1 who is in the two-point area; (c) A2 who is in the three-point area; or (d) A2 who is in the two-point area. The ball continues in flight and goes through A's basket. RULING: In (a) and (b), three points are scored since the legal touching was by the defense and the ball was thrown from behind the three-point line. In (c), score three points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred behind the three-point line. In (d), score two points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred in the two-point area.

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!! I didn't have my books here and this (in red) is exacly what I needed....and i agree with your commentary.

A deflection by a defender for a ball that was clearly not going to go in ends the original throw and is only two points!!!!



Also, the orange text mentioned continuing in flight...a ball that makes a 90 degree turn is not continuing in flight, it's a new flight.

[Nevadaref]

There is a picture of a defensive player deflecting a shot shortly after it is released on the top of page 38 of the 2005-06 Simplified & Illustrated. I believe that it is this type of touching that the NFHS had in mind when writing 5.2.1 Sit C, but I can't say for sure.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Also, the orange text mentioned continuing in flight...a ball that makes a 90 degree turn is not continuing in flight, it's a new flight.

As some esteemed (read: old) members would ask:

Rules reference, please?

What percentage of turn would constitute a "change of direction" vs. a simple deflection? 75 degress? 45 degrees? 7.238 degrees? It's already a pain in the butt carrying around that air pressure gauge; now do I have to start carrying a protractor?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

4.41.4 SITUATION B: A1's three-point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a) A2; or (b) B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. RULING: The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1)

5.2.1 SITUATION C: A1 throws the ball from behind the three-point line. The ball is legally touched by: (a) B1 who is in the three-point area; (b) B1 who is in the two-point area; (c) A2 who is in the three-point area; or (d) A2 who is in the two-point area. The ball continues in flight and goes through A's basket. RULING: In (a) and (b), three points are scored since the legal touching was by the defense and the ball was thrown from behind the three-point line.In (c), score three points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred behind the three-point line. In (d), score two points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred in the two-point area.[/COLOR]

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!

I agree there's a discrepency between the two cases, but it is the difference is between a try and a throw. So, isn't a throw exactly what happened in the OP? How would you explain to A's coach, who would happen to know this ruling, why you are only awarding 2 points?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Y2Koach

in situation 1, i was thinking it should be 2 points, but im not exactly sure why. something keeps popping in my head with the words "unobstructed" but i can't find it in the book and it wouldn't explain a partially blocked 3point shot that goes in. This one I guess I am looking for advice on where to look in the rulebook to verify either side whether its 2 or 3 points.

There is no such language from what I can remember. This is also not a shot, it is a pass that was deflected by the defense.

Originally Posted by Y2Koach

in situation 2, I was thinking this was handled very well. Just wanted to see if there was any input from officials to this odd situation.

All that I can say is that you should shoot everything in the order that they took place. I cannot comment about what was said and if there should have been Ts or not.

Originally Posted by Y2Koach

in situation 3, it appeared that the official was trying to give a "make-up call" (B1 fouled A1, foul was not called, team B should have gotten the ball on the over-and-back or out-of-bounds). I'm sure most of you would have called the foul in the first place, but if for some reason you did not call the foul, which team would you reward possession to?

With all due respect, what the hell is a make up call? This is coach speak more than anything.

And you would be wrong about what most of us would do. First I did not see the play and it is likely the conversation was about other contact and not the contact you claim took place (the effort for the ball could have been where the "foul" was referred to). I know you think the exchange that you heard might be a key to something, but it could have been only part of the story. For one did you hear all the other conversations this official had with this coach? Based on the fact it was not your game and you likely were not watching every minute, it is possible there is more to this situation than you are letting on.

Peace

[Y2Koach]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

With all due respect, what the hell is a make up call? This is coach speak more than anything.

And you would be wrong about what most of us would do. First I did not see the play and it is likely the conversation was about other contact and not the contact you claim took place (the effort for the ball could have been where the "foul" was referred to). I know you think the exchange that you heard might be a key to something, but it could have been only part of the story. For one did you hear all the other conversations this official had with this coach? Based on the fact it was not your game and you likely were not watching every minute, it is possible there is more to this situation than you are letting on.

Peace

I was sitting by the scorers table right where the play happened (I was seated there to help the new kid operate the scoreboard). The ref basically admitted seeing the slap on the arm and bump out of bounds but didnt call the foul. It was pretty apparent that he meant that it was a foul, he didnt call the foul, but didnt feel it was fair to give the ball to team B so he was going to give it to team A since it was obvious fouls that caused the play.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Y2Koach

I was sitting by the scorers table right where the play happened (I was seated there to help the new kid operate the scoreboard). The ref basically admitted seeing the slap on the arm and bump out of bounds but didnt call the foul. It was pretty apparent that he meant that it was a foul, he didnt call the foul, but didnt feel it was fair to give the ball to team B so he was going to give it to team A since it was obvious fouls that caused the play.

If you have it all figured out, why are you asking us? Seriously then if you understood the entire exchange, the only person you can really say something to is the official that made the call. I know how parts of conversations get turned into other meanings when people are not around the entire time. Unless the officials said that to you, it is very likely there is more to the situation. You do not have to accept my opinion, but you did ask for opinions (keep that in mind).

Peace

[Ref in PA]

I cannot believe this discussion has gone on for 6 pages.

Read 4-41-4: "The try ends when the throw is successful, when it is certain the throw is unsuccessful, when the thrown ball touches the floor or when the ball becomes dead."

It doesn't matter if it was a try or a throw from behind the arc. What matters is if the referee judges the orignal throw is certain to be unsuccessful. On a throw that originates behind the arc and in touched by a defensive player near the right block (as stated in the OP) you have one of two choices - GT or a throw that is certain will not go through the hoop. If it was not GT then the try has ended by definition. Case 4.41.4 then applies.

To argue 5.2.1 applies over the defintion in 4-41-4 and case play 4.41.4 is irresponsible, you are picking a choosing what you wish to enforce. If you did that in my area, say goodbye to varsity and post season refereeing.

Cases repeated here again for reference.
4.41.4 SITUATION B: A1's three-point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of: (a) A2; or (b) B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket. RULING: The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored in both (a) and (b). (5-1)

5.2.1 SITUATION C: A1 throws the ball from behind the three-point line. The ball is legally touched by: (a) B1 who is in the three-point area; (b) B1 who is in the two-point area; (c) A2 who is in the three-point area; or (d) A2 who is in the two-point area. The ball continues in flight and goes through A's basket. RULING: In (a) and (b), three points are scored since the legal touching was by the defense and the ball was thrown from behind the three-point line. In (c), score three points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred behind the three-point line. In (d), score two points since the legal touch by a teammate occurred in the two-point area.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

Read 4-41-4: "The try ends when the throw is successful, when it is certain the throw is unsuccessful, when the thrown ball touches the floor or when the ball becomes dead."

The problem is that 5-2-1 makes it irrelevant whether or not the thrown ball is a try.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

The problem is that 5-2-1 makes it irrelevant whether or not the thrown ball is a try.

Yea, what he said.