A few situations/questions

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Camron - I don't know; I'll have to ask next time I see one of them.

Again, I don't really disagree with your assertions, but can you give me a rule or case that states otherwise? If the rule specifically stated "try" only, then once the ball goes below the rim, we could say the 3-pt. try has ended, and now it's just a live ball entering the basket that would be counted as 2. But the rule doesn't say that. Maybe that's the "trade-off" that the rules-makers are allowing - it takes the judgement call away as to whether it is a try or pass, but in exchange it might allow some "crazy-looking" 3-point baskets.

That rule was not written with the consideration of a deflection....a different rule is in place for that. When the two are put together, some common sense must be used otherwise you'll end up with an Old School.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why did you even ask?

Peace

Because it's like banging your head on a wall - it feels so good when you stop.

Or, who knows, (s)he might even come up with one. I can't wait to see that.

[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

[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 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?

[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?

[Old School]

I stand corrected, but I'm not so sure I understand the ruling. I certainly don't agree with it but it's not the first time. If the ball was a thrown pass to a teammate, it has no chance of going in, yet deflected by the defense and count it 3, oh boy, I'm not understanding the logic behind that.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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

Rules reference, please?

The same one that backs up 4.41.4 SITUATION B as stated above.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

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?

I think the case makes it pretty clear. Once the ball, as originally thrown, is determined to have no chance of entering the basket (dropped below the rim, thrown away from the rim, never reached the height of the rim and is decending, etc.), any subsequent deflection is a new action....not to be considered part of the original throw...and not eligible for 3 points.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think the case makes it pretty clear. Once the ball, as originally thrown, is determined to have no chance of entering the basket (dropped below the rim, thrown away from the rim, never reached the height of the rim and is decending, etc.), any subsequent deflection is a new action....not to be considered part of the original throw...and not eligible for 3 points.

Now that is basically what I wrote earlier, and in my opinion is much better than the "change of direction" criterion you previously posted.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

When does the ball stop being a thrown ball and take on a new status?

I assert that the ball is no longer a thrown ball when it's direction is substantially changed by a defender or when it clearly will not go in on it's own. See my two examples I just posted to illustrate that very point.

The rules don't actually say but I can be certain that a ball that has rebounded off the front of the rim and is heading directly away from the basket is no longer a thrown ball.

The rule doesn't, as one camp would argue, allow for that...they'd say its a thrown ball until it hits a teammate, floor, or official as the rule, as written, doesn't indicate any other way for the throw to end. As that group interprets the rule, all rebounds (from a throw from behind the arc) that are tapped in by the defense are still a 3.

I see where you're coming from, and I think that that should be how we call an FGA versus a 3PA in this situation. However, I don't believe that the current rule allows that. From what I recall, the intent of the change was to state that if A releases the ball beyond the 3-point arc, and it somehow goes into the basket, we score 3 points unless:

1. another player from A touches the ball while he/she is in (or has jumped from inside) the 3-point arc, or
2. the ball hits the court inside the 3-point arc or an official standing inside the 3-point arc

Do any of you rulebook savers out there have the book from the first year this change went into effect?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Do any of you rulebook savers out there have the book from the first year this change went into effect?

It is listed in the '01-'02 book. It reads the same way that it does now and there is no case play to clarify it.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

I stand corrected, but I'm not so sure I understand the ruling.

Same old, same old......

Nothing ever changes.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The same one that backs up 4.41.4 SITUATION B as stated above.


I think the case makes it pretty clear. Once the ball, as originally thrown, is determined to have no chance of entering the basket (dropped below the rim, thrown away from the rim, never reached the height of the rim and is decending, etc.), any subsequent deflection is a new action....not to be considered part of the original throw...and not eligible for 3 points.

You're right - the case play does make it clear, but you are mixing the two cases. The one you keep citing specifically mentions "try", the one I cite says "throw". If you have a "try", then you do have all the elements of when a try ends. However, if the ball is thrown, the only specific requirements listed in the rules for it to be not counted as a 3-pt. basket is if it touches a teammate within the arc, hits an official, or hits the floor. 5.2.1(c) also says none of the elements you've listed.

Philisophically I don't disagree with you that it seems silly to count your examples as 3-point baskets. It's just that the rule and case make it clear they are.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

It is listed in the '01-'02 book. It reads the same way that it does now and there is no case play to clarify it.

Was there anything in the comments on the rule revisions?