2.3 Referees Authority

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I However, the one in red is simply game management, ignoring a rule already in place. 2-3 says it only covers situations not covered by the rules.

Game management is to "ignore" the touching? Fine,if it is simply a dribbler's foot touching the foot of a sitting player. Now, what if the ball hits a bench player whose foot is "on the court" and rolls away, where a defender picks it up and goes in for a layup? Ignore that too? No. I think the authority to blow the whistle and return the ball to the offense is covered by 2-3.

Further, the "restraining line" rule requires a dotted line to be on the floor. It's not going to happen in this gym. And I am not going to refuse to ref. You can call this "ignoring" a rule. I prefer to say that I am using my authority under 2-3 to make decisions not covered by the rules.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

1) So...if a player, dribbling, touches a player "out of bounds" do you call a violation? Or impose 2-3.

2)Similar...if a ball goes out of bound at the bench location, it is literally impossible for the player to stand OOB for a throw-in. Again...you must impose 2-3. If you bring the ball to another "legal" throw-in spot (where the player can actually stand OOB), then you are ignoring the rule that says the ball must be put in play at the spot nearest to where it went OOB. .

1) I hope that you don't do either. It isn't a violation. See NFHS rule 7-1-1 and case book play 7.1.1SitA. Rule 2-3 is for something that isn't covered by the rules. This one is.

2)Again, this is already covered under existing rules- R1-2-2. No need at all to make up a rule using R2-3. And I don't know whereintheheck you got the idea that there has to be a painted or marked "restraining line" on the court,as you stated in a previous post. Look up NFHS rule 7-6-4NOTE. That says that the administering official on a throw-in can impose an imaginary restraining line.

You're much better off to learn the existing rules before you start making up your own to replace them.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) I hope that you don't do either. It isn't a violation. See NFHS rule 7-1-1 and case book play 7.1.1SitA. Rule 2-3 is for something that isn't covered by the rules. This one is.

2)Again, this is already covered under existing rules- R1-2-2. No need at all to make up a rule using R2-3. And I don't know whereintheheck you got the idea that there has to be a painted or marked "restraining line" on the court,as you stated in a previous post. Look up NFHS rule 7-6-4NOTE. That says that the administering official on a throw-in can impose an imaginary restraining line.

You're much better off to learn the existing rules before you start making up your own to replace them.

I agree with JR. That said, I think your example of the ball hitting a player on teh bench (in the small gym example) might be a valid use of 2-3 (otr maybe it's just game management).

Wasn't there some NBA or NCAA game last year where a sub on his way from the bench to the table somehow got involved with the play? I think the officials just gave the ball back to the offense.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I don't know whereintheheck you got the idea that there has to be a painted or marked "restraining line" on the court,as you stated in a previous post. Look up NFHS rule 7-6-4NOTE. That says that the administering official on a throw-in can impose an imaginary restraining line.

I get it from the Rules.

1-2-2: "If...there is less than 3 feet of unobstructed space outside any sideline or end line, a narrow broken line shall be marked on the court parallel with and 3 feet inside that boundary. This restraining line becomes the boundary line during a throw in ...."

I don't make this stuff up.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

I get it from the Rules.

1-2-2: "If...there is less than 3 feet of unobstructed space outside any sideline or end line, a narrow broken line shall be marked on the court parallel with and 3 feet inside that boundary. This restraining line becomes the boundary line during a throw in ...."

I don't make this stuff up.

See rule 7-6-4NOTE. I didn't make that up either.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

That said, I think your example of the ball hitting a player on the bench (in the small gym example) might be a valid use of 2-3 (or maybe it's just game management).

Could be either really, I guess.

Or maybe the case where a player came off the bench to block a shot? Covered now but wasn't before.

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

See rule 7-6-4NOTE. I didn't make that up either.

Yes...but I did not question your knowledge or your integrity: "whereintheheck you got the idea that there has to be a painted or marked 'restraining line.'"

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) I hope that you don't do either. It isn't a violation. See NFHS rule 7-1-1 and case book play 7.1.1SitA. Rule 2-3 is for something that isn't covered by the rules. This one is.

Ah, yes, my favorite metaphysical rule.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Yes...but I did not question your knowledge or your integrity: "whereintheheck you got the idea that there has to be a painted or marked 'restraining line.'"

I did not question your integrity. I sureasheck did question your rules knowledge on both scenarios that you brought up. You were completely wrong, rules-wise, in both of the situations that you brought up.

And then you said "I don't make this stuff up". Isn't that questioning my knowledge and integrity, using your own criteria?

The problem seems to be that you don't know enough "stuff" in the first place.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Game management is to "ignore" the touching?

Yup, you can't use 2-3, because it's covered by the rules.

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Fine,if it is simply a dribbler's foot touching the foot of a sitting player. Now, what if the ball hits a bench player whose foot is "on the court" and rolls away, where a defender picks it up and goes in for a layup? Ignore that too? No. I think the authority to blow the whistle and return the ball to the offense is covered by 2-3.

This might just be a 2-3 event.

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Further, the "restraining line" rule requires a dotted line to be on the floor. It's not going to happen in this gym. And I am not going to refuse to ref. You can call this "ignoring" a rule. I prefer to say that I am using my authority under 2-3 to make decisions not covered by the rules.

While the rules for court markings require a restraining line in small gyms, they also make a specific allowance for the official to create an imaginary one in the absence of a dotted line. This is not a 2-3 situation.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Fine,if it is simply a dribbler's foot touching the foot of a sitting player. Now, what if the ball hits a bench player whose foot is "on the court" and rolls away, where a defender picks it up and goes in for a layup? Ignore that too? No. I think the authority to blow the whistle and return the ball to the offense is covered by 2-3.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

This might just be a 2-3 event.

Nope. 7-1-2b, 7-2-1 and 9-3 cover this pretty well.