Basket Interference or Not!

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Because they watch the NBA where it is BI. Rule 11, Section I - i. http://www.nba.com/analysis/rules_11...av=ArticleList

That and it does seem a little inconsistent....B1 slaps the backboard in a "legitimate" attempt to block the shot, and causes the backboard (and attached ring) to vibrate, no call...B1 grabs the ring and pulls down it in causing the ring to vibrate, you can have BI......both cases the ring vibrates, but only one is BI...I was one of those who had this misconception, but am now straightened out, but I sympathize!

[BktBallRef]

Grabbing the rim and BI have nothing to do with the rim vibrating.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Grabbing the rim and BI have nothing to do with the rim vibrating.

I thought there was a caseplay where B1 pulls the rim down and releases it causing it to vibrate during the attempt resulting in BI...anyone? I don't have my casebook..

[Johnny Ringo]

What if the ball is in on the rim ... the attempt to block the shot causes the entire structure to shake and ball fails to go through the hoop ... what do you have here?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

What if the ball is in on the rim ... the attempt to block the shot causes the entire structure to shake and ball fails to go through the hoop ... what do you have here?

nothin'

And really, how often does this actually happen? I can't say I've EVER seen it.

[Johnny Ringo]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

nothin'

And really, how often does this actually happen? I can't say I've EVER seen it.

I can't say I have ever seen it either ... but I have had a lot of partners who have!

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

I can't say I have ever seen it either ... but I have had a lot of partners who have!

LOL!!

[Johnny Ringo]

Partners from the Lead position too!

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

What if the ball is in on the rim ... the attempt to block the shot causes the entire structure to shake and ball fails to go through the hoop ... what do you have here?

If it was a legitimate attempt to block the shot, then I have nothing. If it was an intentional slap to bring attention to himself, then I have a T. What happens to the ball simply does not matter.

There is no rules support for awarding 2 points for BI.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by kbilla

I thought there was a caseplay where B1 pulls the rim down and releases it causing it to vibrate during the attempt resulting in BI...anyone? I don't have my casebook..

I was referring to the rim returning to it's normal position, which is different than hitting it and causing it to vibrate.

[BillyMac]

A player cannot touch the ball, ring, or net while the ball is on the ring or within the basket. A player cannot touch the ball if it is in the imaginary cylinder above the ring. These are examples of basket interference. It is legal to touch the ring or the net if the ball is above the ring and not touching the ring, even if the ball is in the imaginary cylinder above the ring. It is legal to hang on the ring if a player is avoiding an injury to himself or herself or another player.

The backboard has nothing to do with goaltending. Goaltending is contacting the ball on its downward flight, above the level of the rim, with a chance to go in. On most layups, the ball is going up after it contacts the backboard. It is legal to pin the ball against the backboard if it still on the way up and not in the imaginary cylinder above the basket. Slapping the backboard is neither basket interference nor is it goaltending and points cannot be awarded. A player who strikes a backboard so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul. When a player simply attempts to block a shot and accidentally slaps the backboard it is neither a violation nor is it a technical foul.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It is legal to hang on the ring if a player is avoiding an injury to himself or herself or another player.

Not exactly. While safety absolves a player from getting a technical foul for hanging on the rim, it does not eliminate the possibility of basket interference (or goal tending if the ball bounces on their hand as it is partly in the cylinder on it's inintial descent).

A2 grabs the rim while in the process of missing a dunk....officials judges that B1 is right under A2 and does not call a T. A1 taps the ball in. A2 is still hanging on the rim when A1's shot bounces on the rim....BI.

[9redskin4]

Thanks guys. I will change my ways. In both situations the player was not making an attempt to block the ball, therefore the tech was correct. The BI was not.

[kbilla]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Grabbing the rim and BI have nothing to do with the rim vibrating.

Found what I was looking for cb play 9.11.4 where the shot strikes a vibrating ring that was caused by B2 pulling down on the rim to avoid injury, you no tech (to avoid injury), but you have BI.....never seen it, but it could happen...

What this play doesn't discuss though is what if B2 pulled down on the rim intentionally and the shot struck the rim while it was vibrating? You'd have the tech for sure, but would you still count the goal for BI in this case too?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by kbilla

Found what I was looking for cb play 9.11.4 where the shot strikes a vibrating ring that was caused by B2 pulling down on the rim to avoid injury, you no tech (to avoid injury), but you have BI.....never seen it, but it could happen...

What this play doesn't discuss though is what if B2 pulled down on the rim intentionally and the shot struck the rim while it was vibrating? You'd have the tech for sure, but would you still count the goal for BI in this case too?

You can have both BI (for violation 4-6-4) and a T. Note that this rule was jsut added a couple of years ago and has nothing to do with the OP or any other cause of the ring "vibrating"