Good gosh! I kicked it

[FrankHtown]

The span of time between the release of the ball and the whistle. I knew just from your "internal clock" that it was getting close to 5 seconds, and the ball was in the air, almost from the endline to near mid court, when the whistle sounded. His whistle didn't sound until the ball was well on it's way, and he never made a clear signal what he had. Thats why i asked him what he had.

He learned something, and I was reminded of something.

[Adam]

Makes sense to me. Good catch.

[Nevadaref]

Hopefully, both of you will never make either of those mistakes again. I don't mind mistakes. I just have a problem with not learning from them and repeating them.

[Idaho]

Once again, I don't have my rule books with me. Can someone clarify on the OP?

Is the rule on IW during no team control POI? Is that a new rule?

Thanks.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Idaho

Once again, I don't have my rule books with me. Can someone clarify on the OP?

Is the rule on IW during no team control POI? Is that a new rule?

Thanks.

Yes, POI governs this play.

RULE 4, SECTION 36 POINT OF INTERRUPTION
ART. 1 . . . Method of resuming play due to an official's accidental whistle, an interrupted game, as in 5-4-3, a correctable error, as in 2-10-6, a double personal, double technical or simultaneous foul, as in 4-19-8 and 4-19-10.
ART. 2 …Play shall be resumed by one of the following:
a. A throw-in to the team that was in control at a spot nearest to where the ball was located when the stoppage occurred.
b. A free throw or a throw-in when the stoppage occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such.
c. An alternating-possession throw-in when the point of interruption is such that neither team is in control and no goal, infraction, nor end of quarter/extra period is involved.

[Adam]

No this is not a new rule.

[Nevadaref]

The NFHS POI rule was adopted in the 2005-06 season, and if Idaho wasn't officiating for a couple of years, it is new to him.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yes, POI governs this play.

RULE 4, SECTION 36 POINT OF INTERRUPTION
ART. 1 . . . Method of resuming play due to an official's accidental whistle, an interrupted game, as in 5-4-3, a correctable error, as in 2-10-6, a double personal, double technical or simultaneous foul, as in 4-19-8 and 4-19-10.
ART. 2 …Play shall be resumed by one of the following:
a. A throw-in to the team that was in control at a spot nearest to where the ball was located when the stoppage occurred.
b. A free throw or a throw-in when the stoppage occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such.
c. An alternating-possession throw-in when the point of interruption is such that neither team is in control and no goal, infraction, nor end of quarter/extra period is involved.

But, here's another test/study guide question:

While A1's pass is in the air to A2, B1 deflects the pass. Official inadvertently sounds the whistle and grants a time out requested by team A's coach. Official rules the time-ou cannot be denied or revoked and after the time-out has expired, uses the alternating possession procedure to resume play.
Ruling: Correct procedure

According to what is written above, this is not the correct procedure. Team A still has team control, so we must give the ball back to team A, even if a B player was inches away from gaining possession? Doesn't seem remotely fair to me. Or is this one of those "in control" does not mean "team control" things that we have argued about before?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by just another ref

But, here's another test/study guide question:

While A1's pass is in the air to A2, B1 deflects the pass. Official inadvertently sounds the whistle and grants a time out requested by team A's coach. Official rules the time-ou cannot be denied or revoked and after the time-out has expired, uses the alternating possession procedure to resume play.
Ruling: Correct procedure

According to what is written above, this is not the correct procedure. Team A still has team control, so we must give the ball back to team A, even if a B player was inches away from gaining possession? Doesn't seem remotely fair to me. Or is this one of those "in control" does not mean "team control" things that we have argued about before?

You are correct that the study guide is incorrect.

Give the ball back to A.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

But, here's another test/study guide question:

While A1's pass is in the air to A2, B1 deflects the pass. Official inadvertently sounds the whistle and grants a time out requested by team A's coach. Official rules the time-ou cannot be denied or revoked and after the time-out has expired, uses the alternating possession procedure to resume play.
Ruling: Correct procedure

According to what is written above, this is not the correct procedure. Team A still has team control, so we must give the ball back to team A, even if a B player was inches away from gaining possession? Doesn't seem remotely fair to me. Or is this one of those "in control" does not mean "team control" things that we have argued about before?

Taken straight from last season's interps.

2006-07 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 12: A1 is passing the ball to A2 in the frontcourt. The pass is deflected by B1 and is in the air when the official erroneously blows the whistle and grants a time-out request by (a) Team A's head coach, or (b) Team B's head coach. RULING: In (a) and (b), even though there was no player control and the ball was not dead, the time-out is entitled to be used since it was granted. The time-out once granted cannot be revoked and is charged to the appropriate team. The stoppage should be treated as an accidental whistle by the official and play shall resume at the point of interruption. Team A, which was in team control, is entitled to a throw-in at a spot nearest to where the ball was located (last in contact with a player or the court) when the stoppage occurred. (4-36-1, 2a; 5-8-3; 7-4-4)

[Kelvin green]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yes, POI governs this play.

RULE 4, SECTION 36 POINT OF INTERRUPTION
ART. 1 . . . Method of resuming play due to an official's accidental whistle, an interrupted game, as in 5-4-3, a correctable error, as in 2-10-6, a double personal, double technical or simultaneous foul, as in 4-19-8 and 4-19-10.
ART. 2 …Play shall be resumed by one of the following:
a. A throw-in to the team that was in control at a spot nearest to where the ball was located when the stoppage occurred.
b. A free throw or a throw-in when the stoppage occurred during this activity or if a team is entitled to such.
c. An alternating-possession throw-in when the point of interruption is such that neither team is in control and no goal, infraction
, nor end of quarter/extra period is involved.

I am going to play devil's advocate here. By strict rule definition there is no team control in the initial play. Team A was throwing it in and ball was released when whistle blew. POI specifically states the throwin to team in control when stoppage ocuured and AP throw in when point of interruption is such that neither team is in control...
If a foul ocuured while ball was in the air, you would not have a team control foul but a common foul and if in bonus it would be 1+1...

So If there is no team control, why by rule would you put this in play with POI? BecauseSection b clearly states however that play resumes by a throw-in if stoppage occurred during this activity....

Lets look at the technical absuridity of this rule...

Original play ball is not touched we have IW and we give the ball back to Team A because the IW occurred during the throw-in..

Modify the play... Team B barely brushes the ball ball on the throw-in as it is being passed in bounds from A1 to A2. Throw-in is now over. There is no team control, there is no throw-in, now by rule we have to go to the arrow.

This is where I think the rules need to change. My editorial comment.... I think it is stupid that player A is standing out of bounds holding the ball and we say that the team is not in control because we worry about writing some sort of exception in the book so that we dont have BC or a three second call, or some other infaction tied to team control on a throw-in.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

I am going to play devil's advocate here. By strict rule definition there is no team control in the initial play. Team A was throwing it in and ball was released when whistle blew. POI specifically states the throwin to team in control when stoppage ocuured and AP throw in when point of interruption is such that neither team is in control...
If a foul ocuured while ball was in the air, you would not have a team control foul but a common foul and if in bonus it would be 1+1...

So If there is no team control, why by rule would you put this in play with POI? BecauseSection b clearly states however that play resumes by a throw-in if stoppage occurred during this activity....

Lets look at the technical absuridity of this rule...

Original play ball is not touched we have IW and we give the ball back to Team A because the IW occurred during the throw-in..

Modify the play... Team B barely brushes the ball ball on the throw-in as it is being passed in bounds from A1 to A2. Throw-in is now over. There is no team control, there is no throw-in, now by rule we have to go to the arrow.

This is where I think the rules need to change. My editorial comment.... I think it is stupid that player A is standing out of bounds holding the ball and we say that the team is not in control because we worry about writing some sort of exception in the book so that we dont have BC or a three second call, or some other infaction tied to team control on a throw-in.

What's absurd is that there are no defensive players during that time.