The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Goal Tending (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/41366-goal-tending.html)

scotties7125 Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:50pm

Goal Tending
 
I dont have a case book so i thouhgt i ask you guys. Watching a jv game and A1 made an attempt missed completly and B1 goes up for the rebound hitting the net. The refs called this goaltending im jsut curious as to if this is or not.

Gimlet25id Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotties7125
I dont have a case book so i thouhgt i ask you guys. Watching a jv game and A1 made an attempt missed completly and B1 goes up for the rebound hitting the net. The refs called this goaltending im jsut curious as to if this is or not.

If I understand your play, A1 shoots misses badly, B1 goes up for the rebound hitting the net on the way up.

If no part of the ball is on the rim or the imaginary cylinder above the rim which has the ring as its base then this is nothing and even if it was it would never be goal-tending.

If the ball was on the rim or in the imaginary cylinder and B1 hits the net, the call would be basket interference.

Bad Zebra Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotties7125
I dont have a case book so i thouhgt i ask you guys. Watching a jv game and A1 made an attempt missed completly and B1 goes up for the rebound hitting the net. The refs called this goaltending im jsut curious as to if this is or not.

Based on your grammar and punctuation, I'm not clear on the play you're describing. However, if the defender had his hands in the net while the ball was on the ring or in the cylinder, it would be basket interference, not goaltending.

scotties7125 Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:06pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra
Based on your grammar and punctuation, I'm not clear on the play you're describing. However, if the defender had his hands in the net while the ball was on the ring or in the cylinder, it would be basket interference, not goaltending.

Sorry about the grammer not a big fan of typing. The best way i can put it was no the ball was not in the cylinder above
the rim. When Player B1 touched the net the ball was in the cornor of the rim and back board.

Gimlet25id Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotties7125
Sorry about the grammer not a big fan of typing. The best way i can put it was no the ball was not in the cylinder above
the rim. When Player B1 touched the net the ball was in the cornor of the rim and back board.

Read previous post...Basket Interference not Goal-tending.

scotties7125 Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
Read previous post...Basket Interference not Goal-tending.

Ok Then the offical must of duffed this one he called it goal tending and couting the basket.

Gimlet25id Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotties7125
Ok Then the offical must of duffed this one he called it goal tending and couting the basket.

Either way you would still count the basket for the "A" team. B/I & G/T carry the same penalty on the defensive team.

bob jenkins Sat Jan 26, 2008 12:32am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
If no part of the ball is on the rim or the imaginary cylinder above the rim which has the ring as its base then this is nothing and even if it was it would never be goal-tending.

If the ball was on the rim or in the imaginary cylinder and B1 hits the net, the call would be basket interference.

It's not BI to touch the basket while the ball is in the cylinder. It's nothing.

Nevadaref Sat Jan 26, 2008 05:55am

Quote:

Originally Posted by scotties7125
Ok Then the offical must of duffed this one he called it goal tending and couting the basket.

He's not the only one. ;)
Listen to Bob Jenkins. He has it right.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
If I understand your play, A1 shoots misses badly, B1 goes up for the rebound hitting the net on the way up.

If no part of the ball is on the rim or the imaginary cylinder above the rim which has the ring as its base then this is nothing and even if it was it would never be goal-tending.

If the ball was on the rim or in the imaginary cylinder and B1 hits the net, the call would be basket interference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra
Based on your grammar and punctuation, I'm not clear on the play you're describing. However, if the defender had his hands in the net while the ball was on the ring or in the cylinder, it would be basket interference, not goaltending.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins
It's not BI to touch the basket while the ball is in the cylinder. It's nothing.


Bad Zebra Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:02am

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins
It's not BI to touch the basket while the ball is in the cylinder. It's nothing.

If the ball has fallen through the ring, isn't it in the cylinder? or is it only considered a cylinder above the ring?

Jurassic Referee Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:14am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bad Zebra
If the ball has fallen through the ring, isn't it in the cylinder? or is it only considered a cylinder above the ring?

Rule 4-6-2.:rolleyes:

scotties7125 Sat Jan 26, 2008 02:51pm

ok Thank you very much.

Gimlet25id Sat Jan 26, 2008 06:06pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by bob jenkins
It's not BI to touch the basket while the ball is in the cylinder. It's nothing.

Let me rephrase no BI if the net is touched while the ball is off the rim & in the imaginary cylinder. The ball would have to be touched in order for this to be BI. If the ball is on or in then BI would apply

Rule 4-6-2...Touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket.

I read this to say that if the ball is in the cylinder not the imaginary cylinder, but the cylinder of the basket (RIM) and the net is touched then that would be BI. (This might be what BOB is saying anyway)

In the OP's play the ball is on the ring when the net is touched, BI.

Jurassic Referee Sat Jan 26, 2008 08:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
If the ball was on the rim <font color = red>or in the <b>imaginary</b> cylinder</font> and B1 hits the net, <font color = red>the call would be basket interference</font>.

You can rephrase it, but your re-phrasing is 100% diametrically opposite to what you stated above. As per NFHS rule 4-6-1&2, you were completely wrong. That's what Bob was telling you.

Gimlet25id Sat Jan 26, 2008 08:47pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
You can rephrase it, but your re-phrasing is 100% diametrically opposite to what you stated above. As per NFHS rule 4-6-2, you were completely wrong. That's what Bob was telling you.

Can't get nothing by you JR!!!! I got to writing to quickly between BI and GT and didn't take the time to comprehend what I wrote....thus why I said let me rephrase!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
If no part of the ball is on the rim or the imaginary cylinder above the rim which has the ring as its base then this is nothing and even if it was it would never be goal-tending.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gimlet25id
If the ball was on the rim or in the imaginary cylinder and B1 hits the net, the call would be basket interference.

"DELETE IMAGINARY"

Your right! I was wrong! Thanks for being so quick to point that out.:rolleyes:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:50am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1