delay of game warning or not?

[Slider]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Hey Mark, there were so many rules quoted I guess I missed
the NF rule/case play/comics/bulletin/interp that states the delay warning after a made field goal can only apply to
the team who just scored. Thanks. [/B]

And, I missed the one that unambiguously says disposal can begin inbounds. Don't hold your breath Dan.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Slider
[B
... Don't hold your breath Dan. [/B]

Yeah, I know. But I'm an optimist.

[mick]

Originally posted by Slider

Mark T. you really put me in a bind, all 3 of you appear on my top 5 list of gurus, so lets look at the tally (btw, I worked the Florida elections):


For Violation: DeNucci

Neutralized:
BktBallRef (Knox won't support his interp. here)
Padgett (he's about to crumble, I can feel it, and the rest of his resistance is netralized by MY vote)

For Warning: bob jenkins

---------------------

We have a tie!!!!

But wait, we haven't received our vote from "mick" county; what is his opinion?

mick, it is all up to you, you get to play Supreme Court in this debacle.

Sorry to put you on the spot, but we all have to take sides one day. The country awaits your decision.

Slider,

As ball passes through the net, B1 slaps the ball (not too hard, but obviously ticked off that she got beat on D)

I'm envisioning a non-unsporting act.

As usual, when the Team that gets to throw the ball in touches the ball in bounds, I get to choose whether I start my count, or not. I get to judge "at disposal, or not".
The rules are written, or not, to allow me that choice.

I think I have three choices depending on my interpretation of the player's intent.

I can do nothing if the player is mildly upset with herself.

I can start the count immediately, if the player is hoping for some public recognition of her disgust.

I can "T" an unsporting act for a clearly improper reaction.

mick

[Oz Referee]

Mick,

You have hit the nail on the head. Referees are not robots. We are there to use out judgement. If the slapping of the ball is considered (by the individual referee, in the particular situation) to be an unsportsmanlike act - then by all means, call a technical foul for unsportsmanlike behaviour.

If the referee feels that it was not an unsportsmanlike act, but is wasting time, then start the five second count.

If the referee feels that the player lost control of the ball, whilst attempting to pick it up - call nothing, maybe stop the clock to allow the team to retrieve the ball.

This is the wonder of being a sentient being - we can think and make judgements according to specific situations.

I agree with everything that has been posted here so far. You can have a T, 5-second count, or nothing - but the T can't be for delay of game, only for unsportsmanlike behaviour.

[Slider]

Originally posted by mick
I get to judge "at disposal, or not".

Then I shall use my judgement to consider it not at disposal in these situations; unless it rolls OOB near the endline.

I agree that the bat of the ball may be an unsporting act deserving an automatic T depending on how the girl bats it.

If I don't T, and no one picks it up IB, I will always place it OOB near the endline (perhaps after an interference warning), and then start my count.

Thanks for answering my call for help -

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

For all of you who think that the interfering with that ball after a successful score applies to both teams. The warning was adopted to address the problem of the scoring team iterfering with the ball so as to keep the non-scoring team from making a quick throw-in pass. At no time was it ever considered to be applied to the team who is making the throw-in. It is impossible for the throw-in team to interfer with its own throw-in. If my memory serves me correctly, Dick Knox was on the Rules Committee when the rule was adopted and might have been the Chairman too. I heard Dick Schindler (Rules Editor at the time) speak on this rule change at the IAABO Fall Rules Interpreters Meeting. The entire discussion revolved around the scoring team interfering with the ball after it had scored. This is the second thread that I have addressed concerning this particular rule and the second time that I have relayed the information that Dick Schindler gave to the IAABO Interpreters. It does NOT apply to the scoring team and the non-scoring team CANNOT interfer with its own throw-in. We get ourselves into trouble by trying to apply rules to situations for which they do not apply.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
For all of you who think that the interfering with that ball after a successful score applies to both teams. The warning was adopted to address the problem of the scoring team iterfering with the ball so as to keep the non-scoring team from making a quick throw-in pass. At no time was it ever considered to be applied to the team who is making the throw-in. It is impossible for the throw-in team to interfer with its own throw-in. If my memory serves me correctly, Dick Knox was on the Rules Committee when the rule was adopted and might have been the Chairman too. I heard Dick Schindler (Rules Editor at the time) speak on this rule change at the IAABO Fall Rules Interpreters Meeting. The entire discussion revolved around the scoring team interfering with the ball after it had scored. This is the second thread that I have addressed concerning this particular rule and the second time that I have relayed the information that Dick Schindler gave to the IAABO Interpreters. It does NOT apply to the scoring team and the non-scoring team CANNOT interfer with its own throw-in. We get ourselves into trouble by trying to apply rules to situations for which they do not apply.

Yes, yes, of course, of course. Why didn't we mere mortals
think of that. Of course, if it was that simple why didn't
"the powers that be" think to limit the warning and
subsequent T to the scoring team only by putting it in the
rule? BTW, you seemed to have dropped quite a few names
here, don't forget to pick them up on your way out.

Now Mark, maybe you are privvy to some back-room discussions
concerning a kick ball. Is it possible for a member of
the team that has control of the ball to actually violate
by kicking? This has been bothering me for a while, please,
do tell us.

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Now Mark, maybe you are privvy to some back-room discussions
concerning a kick ball. Is it possible for a member of
the team that has control of the ball to actually violate
by kicking? This has been bothering me for a while, please,
do tell us.

DAN!!! Don't you start on me, too!!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I am not dropping any names. The NFHS and NCAA Men's rules editors have addressed the IAABO Fall Interpreters Conference for years. They discuss the new rules changes and answer questions concerning these changes as well as answer questions concerning other rules. Having heard the Rules Editor speak directly to the new rules changes is very enlightening. I am sorry that you are offended that I would relay information that was given to a large group of interpreters by the Rules Editor himself.

There is not a Division I men's or women's official that does not hear Ed Bilik or Barb Jacobs speak at the regional meetings in October. These officials sometimes work a Division III game with two officials who only work at the Division III level. If the Div. I official relays information that they get from Ed or Barb at these meetings, should we accuse these officials of name dropping? I think not.

As a member of IAABO I have had the opporturnity to work on committees with some of the top rules people in the country. I am sorry that I get to talk to these people and you do not. Maybe you should join IAABO.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I am not dropping any names. The NFHS and NCAA Men's rules editors have addressed the IAABO Fall Interpreters Conference for years. They discuss the new rules changes and answer questions concerning these changes as well as answer questions concerning other rules. Having heard the Rules Editor speak directly to the new rules changes is very enlightening. I am sorry that you are offended that I would relay information that was given to a large group of interpreters by the Rules Editor himself.

There is not a Division I men's or women's official that does not hear Ed Bilik or Barb Jacobs speak at the regional meetings in October. These officials sometimes work a Division III game with two officials who only work at the Division III level. If the Div. I official relays information that they get from Ed or Barb at these meetings, should we accuse these officials of name dropping? I think not.

As a member of IAABO I have had the opporturnity to work on committees with some of the top rules people in the country. I am sorry that I get to talk to these people and you do not. Maybe you should join IAABO.

Geeze Mark, stay on the topic will ya? DI, DII and DII use
NCAA rules, not NFHS rules and as we all know there are no
warnings for delay in the NCAA rules. So there are 2
questions on the table for you, please answer at least one
of them.

Why don't the NFHS rules specify warning for delay after a
made basket for the scoring team only?

Is it possible for a member of the team in control of the
ball (the offensive team) to violate by kicking?

BTW, I'm a member in good standing of IAABO and I've been to
an IAABO camp, if that means anything.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter


DAN!!! Don't you start on me, too!!

LOL! I would never start on you, young grasshopper, for I
know you have mastered the art of the T!

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

LOL! I would never start on you, young grasshopper, for I
know you have mastered the art of the T!

This came up a few weeks ago. I was R for the co-rec IM basketball championship game. A1 shot, long rebound, and A2 got a hand on the ball in the air. With no control, he comes down to the ground (so no travel call, although I wish that's what I had called) and starts bobbling the ball. One of the bounces goes off of his leg (leg didn't move), and I called a kick violation (obviously not a kick, but I whistled, froze, and went with the kick).

A3 and A4 - both fellow officials (as is A2 - he didn't say anything) go apesh*t that "there's no such thing as an offensive kick!" (After checking our special rules addendum (to NFHS), I realized that there is a note in our book saying there is no such thing as an offensive kick). I apologized for screwing up our rules, but stood by the fact that a member of team A could have a kick violation. (Technically in the original case, A2 was neither on offense or defense, since team control is lost on a shot.)

I agree that a kick on the "offensive" team is rare. However, I thought up one (and now have a second) example:

(1) A1 throws a long pass to A2, with B1 between the two. With the ball in the air, A3 realizes that B1 will intercept the pass, but A3 cannot reach the ball in time, so A3 kicks the ball to prevent a steal and a fast break.

Violation - A3 gained an illegal advantage in kicking the ball.

(2) A1 is dribbling upcourt. There's heavy pressure, and A1 feels that a pass would be intercepted, so he kicks the ball into the air, over B's heads, to A2 who scores an easy layup.

Violation - it doesn't matter that A has the ball, soccer is the game of feet and legs.

BTW, in this case of the OOB "delay," I say you just start counting when B1 slaps the ball.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Dan_ref:

Team A scores. Team B is entitled to a throw-in anywhere along the endline in its backcourt. How can Team B interfere with the ball on its throw-in? That is a rhetorical question. The answer is: It cannot interfere with the ball on its throw-in.

As I stated before, the rule was adopted because officials were all over the spectrum on how to handle the situation when Team A interfered with the ball after it had just scored. Some officials would tell Team A to stop being naughty lads or lassies. Some officials were correctly charging the offending player on Team A a technical foul for delay of game. It was my opinion and that of many interpreters that the delay of technical foul was the correct way to handle this situation. So the NFHS finally decided something had to be done and adopted the rule that we now see in the rules.

The college scenario that I described is applicable to your complaint of me dropping names. Who cares if the scenario I use involves college officials or high school officials, some of whom are lucky enough to hear the Rules Editor speak every year.

I would like to once again to ask you to join IAABO. Just email me through Officiating.com or at [email protected] and I will get you an application for membership in IAABO. In fact I would like to extend my invitation to all officials who are not members of IAABO to join it. You can go to the IAABO website and download an application form.

Its getting late and I need to get my beauty sleep (about ten years worht). Good night everybody.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Dan_ref:

Team A scores. Team B is entitled to a throw-in anywhere along the endline in its backcourt. How can Team B interfere with the ball on its throw-in? That is a rhetorical question. The answer is: It cannot interfere with the ball on its throw-in.

As I stated before, the rule was adopted because officials were all over the spectrum on how to handle the situation when Team A interfered with the ball after it had just scored. Some officials would tell Team A to stop being naughty lads or lassies. Some officials were correctly charging the offending player on Team A a technical foul for delay of game. It was my opinion and that of many interpreters that the delay of technical foul was the correct way to handle this situation. So the NFHS finally decided something had to be done and adopted the rule that we now see in the rules.

The college scenario that I described is applicable to your complaint of me dropping names. Who cares if the scenario I use involves college officials or high school officials, some of whom are lucky enough to hear the Rules Editor speak every year.

I would like to once again to ask you to join IAABO. Just email me through Officiating.com or at [email protected] and I will get you an application for membership in IAABO. In fact I would like to extend my invitation to all officials who are not members of IAABO to join it. You can go to the IAABO website and download an application form.

Its getting late and I need to get my beauty sleep (about ten years worht). Good night everybody.

Mark, are you having trouble with the English language
tonight? I already said I am an IAABO member. Further,
you keep repeating the same answer ("because I said so",
otherwise known as proof by vigorous declaration). I
know why the rule was put in the NF book. I also know that
it does not explicitely exclude warning the scoring team.
If this was the well thought out answer to a well known
problem why was it so poorly worded?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I apologize about not seeing your membership in IAABO. Then I suggest that you talk with your Board interpreter about this rule.