Use of the word "allowance" in NFHS rule 9-7-3...?

[PSidbury]

9-7-3: Allowance shall be made for a player who, having been in the restricted area for less than 3 seconds, dribbles in or moves immediately to try for goal.

And just what is the "allowance"? $10 a week?

Seriously, what is my allowance (which seems like such a subjective term) as opposed to your allowance for a player that "dribbles in... to try for goal" after already being in lane for <3 seconds?

I'm imagining a player already in lane for <3 seconds, receiving ball, and then "backing down" his opponent as he moves toward the goal... a process that could take several long seconds, indeed.

Nonetheless, per the rule above, the player is "dribbling in... to try for goal".

Or he could "move immediately". The rule seems to give two options for approaching the goal with the ball after already occupying the lane.

Thanks,
Paul

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by PSidbury

9-7-3: Allowance shall be made for a player who, having been in the restricted area for less than 3 seconds, dribbles in or moves immediately to try for goal.

And just what is the "allowance"? $10 a week?

Seriously, what is my allowance (which seems like such a subjective term) as opposed to your allowance for a player that "dribbles in... to try for goal" after already being in lane for <3 seconds?

I'm imagining a player already in lane for <3 seconds, receiving ball, and then "backing down" his opponent as he moves toward the goal... a process that could take several long seconds, indeed.

You're imagining wrong. You allow the player with the ball to immediately shoot it....either going straight up right away without any fakes, or driving and immediately shooting. There's no backing down or fakes of any kind, etc. If they don't immediately shoot in one fluid connected motion, you call the violation. If they pass instead of shooting, you call the violation.

"Immediately" is the key word.

Note that the "moves immediately to try for goal" might include a dribble.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You're imagining wrong. You allow the player with the ball to immediately shoot it....either going straight up right away without any fakes, or driving and immediately shooting. There's no backing down or fakes of any kind, etc. If they don't immediately shoot in one fluid connected motion, you call the violation.

Disagree.

If the player is trying to score (pump fake / pivot one-way and step through, etc), then allow it.

I agree that if the ball is passed out of the lane, then it's a violation.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If the player is trying to score (pump fake / pivot one-way and step through, etc), then allow it.

As soon as he pulls the ball down on the pump fake, he's no longer trying to score. Violation.

The pivot/step-through is part of the continuous motion of the try. Legal.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

As soon as he pulls the ball down on the pump fake, he's no longer trying to score. Violation. The pivot/step-through is part of the continuous motion of the try. Legal.

I agree. That's the way we've always been taught here in Connecticut.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You're imagining wrong. You allow the player with the ball to immediately shoot it....either going straight up right away without any fakes, or driving and immediately shooting. There's no backing down or fakes of any kind, etc. If they don't immediately shoot in one fluid connected motion, you call the violation. If they pass instead of shooting, you call the violation.

"Immediately" is the key word.

Note that the "moves immediately to try for goal" might include a dribble.

Disagree.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Disagree.

If the player is trying to score (pump fake / pivot one-way and step through, etc), then allow it.

I agree that if the ball is passed out of the lane, then it's a violation.

Agree.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

As soon as he pulls the ball down on the pump fake, he's no longer trying to score. Violation.

The pivot/step-through is part of the continuous motion of the try. Legal.

Disagree.

[PSidbury]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If they don't immediately shoot in one fluid connected motion, you call the violation.

What I think I am reading in your replies is that upon receipt of ball the player must move immediately regardless of dribble or stationary shot attempt.

But... the rule doesn't say "dribbles in AND moves immediately", it says "dribbles in OR moves immediately".

Its that "OR" part of this rule that leaves a lot to be defined.
It seems to give the player the option to either 1) dribble in to try for goal; OR, 2) move immediately to try for goal.

With that being said, the rule would "allow" a player already in lane for <3 seconds to receive the ball and then "back down" his opponent as he "dribbles in" toward the goal.

I am really trying to not "read too much into the rules," nor split hairs. However, there is clearly an "OR" in that rule and not an "AND".

Plus, using an unquantified expression like "Allowance shall be made..." leaves the door open to have varying interpretations and outcomes for this type of lane play.

Thanks,
Paul

[jdw3018]

The backing down just doesn't fit the intent of the rule, IMO. The player may shoot, or make a move to shoot, but a slow "back down" is not a move to score nor a dribble in to score. It is a dribble in to get a different position which may or may not give a good attempt to score.

Again, this is a judgement call for you as an official.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

The backing down just doesn't fit the intent of the rule, IMO. The player may shoot, or make a move to shoot, but a slow "back down" is not a move to score nor a dribble in to score. It is a dribble in to get a different position which may or may not give a good attempt to score.

Again, this is a judgement call for you as an official.

So to "dribble in," he's not allowed to have his back to the basket? I must have missed that part of the rule.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

So to "dribble in," he's not allowed to have his back to the basket? I must have missed that part of the rule.

He said a "slow back down". You missed that part of the post.

A slow back down is not an immediate move for goal imo either. As he said, it's trying to gain a better position to shoot from.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

So to "dribble in," he's not allowed to have his back to the basket? I must have missed that part of the rule.

I just don't see a "back-down" as part of a scoring move, and that's how I interpret the rule and how I'm interpreting the term "back-down" as well.

There are ways a player can dribble with his/her back to the basket that would be part of a move to score, and those would qualify under the exception IMO. Again, it's a judgement call, and the only point I'm making is that a multiple dribble "slow" back-down does not qualify under the exception.

If it did, a player could back down from the FT line to the goal with a dozen dribbles over 5 seconds...