Trifecta

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I know this will sound like a cop-out, but I really think this is a play that we can't comment on intelligently without seeing it. Here's the good thing about it, though. You're thinking about it. You're asking the right questions. You called a rulebook T and administered it correctly; and now you're wondering if the rulebook T fit the game.

Since I can't comment intelligently without seeing the play, I will comment unintelligently. I think that I would have passed on the T since the ball went in the basket. The shaking of the board didn't affect the shot, so the real reason to call it would be if I thought he was showboating or venting frustration (IOW, the slap is so hard that it can't be ignored).

I wouldn't lose a lot of sleep over it either way, but the self-critique is a sign of a conscientious official.

Thanks Scrapper...I know that the rulebook part of things just references the slap being "intentional", but I wanted to get the input of other college officials as to the practical application. Your comment about the ball going in and therefore not being impacted by the slap was something that entered my mind post-mortum as well and I wondered if this was something that should be considered in the practical sense...the slap wasn't so hard that it was overly demonstrative and I suppose it could have been ignored, but it was in my judgement a no doubt intentional slap....

[grunewar]

Question from a "non-college" official.

If you don't call the T on the backboard slap, don't you set yourself up for it happening again later in the game and having a similar situation to the first blarge no call? As in someone slaps the backboard similarly and you "have to" call the T and get the - " they slapped the backboard and got away with it?"

While I know each situation is different you would certainly have to be consistant and isn't it just easier to call the first?

And Kb - similar to your partner, I let a close blarge go the other night in a JVB game and went with a no call and wish I had it back too....... I need to get better at that!!

[rgncjn]

Nevada took the words out of my mouth. No explanation needed, issue the T and move away.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by grunewar

Question from a "non-college" official.

While I know each situation is different you would certainly have to be consistant and isn't it just easier to call the first?

Funny you should mention this...one comment the coach made was something to the effect of "that happens all the time in the college game and never gets called"...well I thought to myself, it hadn't happened that game prior to this..it didn't happen again after that (thankfully!), and I probably watched all or part of at least 5 NCAA games over the weekend and after my game I was on full alert to see if it happened in any of those games and I never saw it...I don't think I have ever really watched for it much in the past, but I certainly don't think it happens "all the time". I know I haven't had it in a hs game this year, possibly last year but I can't recall. Legitimately going for a block and whiffing and "contacting" the bb is not the same thing as smacking it when the ball is well out of reach...

[kbilla]

One thing I did see in the course of all of those NCAA games though was a blatant violation of the inbound plane that was ignored...can't remember which game it was, but A's ball inbounding from the endline, B is jumping up and down and when he lands, both of his feet are not just on the line, but about 3/4 of the way OVER the line, not to mention his hands which are even further through the plane...granted A1 had plenty of room behind him and he just backed up, but still...to my knowledge this is administered the same as NF with a team warnign and then a team T (indirect) - again to you seasoned college guys is this just a no call? At lease assuming there is room behind the inbounder?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by kbilla

One thing I did see in the course of all of those NCAA games though was a blatant violation of the inbound plane that was ignored...can't remember which game it was, but A's ball inbounding from the endline, B is jumping up and down and when he lands, both of his feet are not just on the line, but about 3/4 of the way OVER the line, not to mention his hands which are even further through the plane...granted A1 had plenty of room behind him and he just backed up, but still...to my knowledge this is administered the same as NF with a team warnign and then a team T (indirect) - again to you seasoned college guys is this just a no call? At lease assuming there is room behind the inbounder?

You need to check the NCAA rule.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You need to check the NCAA rule.

Geez make me work OK, I see 7.6.6.b where the rule is the same as far as an opponent not having any part of his or her person over the inside plane of the boundary line, so what I was seeing was at least a violation that was not called...I see where it is an indirect tech to reach through and touch the ball in 10.3.8, but I don't see anywhere that indicates the penalty for 7.6.b specifically? Help?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Geez make me work OK, I see 7.6.6.b where the rule is the same as far as an opponent not having any part of his or her person over the inside plane of the boundary line, so what I was seeing was at least a violation that was not called...I see where it is an indirect tech to reach through and touch the ball in 10.3.8, but I don't see anywhere that indicates the penalty for 7.6.b specifically? Help?

Hint: Violations are in rule 9.