2.3 Referees Authority
 

Rule 2.3 states that the referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules. Has anyone applied this rule in a game or can you think of any good hypothetical examples. I'm leading a rules study session tomorrow and could really use a couple of good examples.

Personally, I would stay away from such a discussion. Start giving examples of when you might use this and suddenly, guys could start looking for reasons to use it. I've been to a lot of rules clinics and I've never heard anyone use this as a topic.

I hear you and will avoid giving examples and also make the point that this is a rule unlikely to be encountered. Since we go over every rule for testing purposes it will be hard to avoid totally. I'm still interested in any experience applying this rule.

Example: Players, fans, and coaches are so out of hand due to whatever reasons, even after many Technical fouls, that you make the decision to end the game before the game is officially over. I've done it.

Think NBA game pacers vs. pistons where they ended the game.

Last year I was in a game where a kid dislocated his knee. The game was delayed probably 25 minutes. We allowed both teams to warm-up a little before we resumed play. Nothing in the rules says we can do this or even addresses this situation specifically, but we did it because of such a long delay.

Another year I was watching a game with a team from a poorer neighborhood and they had illegal jerseys for the JV game. All jerseys did not have front numbers and the officials did not give any Ts and allowed the team to play. This school also came from a very long way and it just would not have made good sense to penalize the team with the rule.

This is not a hypothetical, but it is a case where you can use some judgment.

Peace

-Small earthqake
-Fire alarm
-Celing tile falls and hits player in the head causing him to travel

Is that called officiating the obvious?

I have had lights go out.... an changed floors in an AAU tournanment...
I have had lights go out and had to wait, so we had to re do warm ups...

Utah had a game a few years back when the rubber/tartan floors were popular (not hardwood). It was a cross town rivalry, gym packed, and moisture was actually building up on the floor. They had to play overtime one one half of the floor.

You may have issues with special needs kids, although it was football, last weekend in a 11 yaer old's game we let them have 12 kids on the field because of the special needs kid, he "played" but did not play if you know what I mean.

Allowed kids to play in a gym where there was no padding on the backboard but it would not affect play beause it was sixth graders.

Enforced other things that may be safety issues not covered specifically by the rule.

Nope, that's not an example of something would be a proper use of 2-3, since there are rules in the book which cover the situation--namely 2-5-4 and 2-8-1 Note.

Not applying a rule that is in the book is not an example of applying 2-3, it is simply an example of ignoring a rule.

I disagree. Then again you are not from the NF, but you want to make the rest of us think you are. ;)

Peace

You can disagree all that you want, but it won't change the fact that 2-3 is for "points not specifically covered in the rules."

While what you did may have been intelligent and in the best interests of that game, it does not mean that your decision to overlook the illegal jerseys was an application of 2-3. It would be poor for wanja to give this as an example to his study class.

PS I have never claimed to be "from the NF" nor do I desire to make anyone think that I am. I don't know where you come up with these prevarications. :(

Wanja,
One of the simplest examples that I can think of would be what happens if the ball were to burst or become deflated during play. To my knowledge this situation is not detailed in the rules or the case book therefore, the referee would have to make a decision on how to handle it. Perhaps JR, MTD, or some other senior official may know of an NFHS ruling from years gone by on this, but I don't.

You could design a play in which during a try for goal the ball strikes the ring or backboard and bursts, but then falls through the basket. You could then ask questions such as: Should this goal count? At what point does the ball become dead? Let's say that no whistle was sounded until the ball struck the floor, but everyone in the gym could hear the ball pop upon striking the ring.

Have a good class. :)

Cover it with the same detail you'll cover "multiple fouls" -- that is, it's in the rulebook, but you should never use it. Then, quickly go on to something productive.

The rules define the size & inflation pressure of the ball.

If the ball bursts I would use that rule to get a new ball since obviously the old ball no longer complies.

We have a winner!

Why waste time on something that might never be needed? I've never used R2-3 or seen it used- going back to 1959. Spend time on things that actually occur, not third world plays.

I can't remember ever seeing a question on an NFHS exam based on R2-3.

Just saying.....

Here's the real definition of rule 2-3, in laymen terms. Rule 2-3 is only to be used when all other avenues have been exhausted, and even then, use with discretion. Emphasize, use with discretion over and over when discussing whether to use this rule or not, especially if there are a lot of new or inexpereinced officials at the meeting. The referee can not think of any other resolution from the rules that covers the unique situation, and in an attempt to keep the game moving. Invoke this rule and keep going.

Possibly the biggest thing to the use of this rule is to "NEVER" tell a coach you are using rule 2-3. Never say rule 2-3 gives me the authoirty to do this. That's dangerous because most situations are in fact covered by the rules and if you are wrong, you are in even more trouble. IOW's, you just kicked the call if you're wrong. If you told the coach R2-3 gives you the right, then not only did you kick the call, you also kick the use of R2-3. That's two mistakes, get it! Again, be very careful with the use of this rule.

Just curious: would that be CE? ;)

Nope. AD. ;)

Nothing in the rules covers situations like a fire or income situations that might affect the actual application of rules or how to alleviate. Or what do you do when the court does not fit the specific rules as written. Do you cancel the game? Do you play? Do you consider a different line as the out of bounds line or division line. I played a year at a Missouri Private School and our court was not regulation and we still played the games. I am not giving Ts to prove I know a rule when circumstances might be unavoidable even if the rule is in conflict.

I think the problem Nevada you need to get out of the desert and get around to many different situations that are not packaged in a perfect little book.

Peace

Jeff,
Nevada's not saying you should have called the Ts. He's saying that giving the leeway there just isn't an application of 2-3 even though it's smart officiating.
Sorta like not calling every travel you see in the 7th grade C game. It may be smart game management, but it's not really an application of 2-3.

Shut up.

You too.

Good, then we disagree. The last time I checked, I do not put must stock in what Nevada thinks. Life will go on. :D

Peace

Ah, come on, Jeff. You're only disagreeing on semantics. :D But hey, if it makes you feel better. ;)

I have worked in a Christian school where the "gym" is a multi-purpose room with baskets and court markings. On the side of the benches (actually folding chairs), it is impossible for a player to sit on a chair and be off the court. So...if a player, dribbling, touches a player "out of bounds" do you call a violation? Or impose 2-3. 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. There are other peculiarities caused by this gym...all of which require 2-3 for a fair game to be played.

I don't know that these are 2-3 situations. Maybe the last one. 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.
The one in blue is covered by the rules as well, under "restraining lines."
Again, these are both covered by rules, but sometimes good game management dictates you might overlook a few things or ignore the rules for the spot of the throwin.
2-3 is rarely invoked, IMO.

BTW, I've worked Christian and public schools with these gym problems. One was even a large school in the 2nd gym.

Private schools are usually smaller than the average public school. If a public school is smaller is usually because the town or district is small.

Peace

yup. I've seen more private than public with these problems, to be sure.

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.

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 <b>imaginary</b> 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.

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.

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.

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.'"

Ah, yes, my favorite metaphysical rule. :p

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

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

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

Yup, you can't use 2-3, because it's covered by the rules. This might just be a 2-3 event.
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.

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