End of game delay warning

[CoachJW]

High school game, everybody is out of timeouts. There have been no delay-of-game warnings issued. Team A is down by 4 with 5 seconds left in the 4th quarter. They have a baseline OB. They inbound and A1 makes a 3-pointer. Now Team A is down by 1 point, but the clock is at about 3 seconds when the ball goes through.

(A) as soon as it goes through the net, A2 grabs it and tosses it toward the bleachers.

Or...

(B) B1 grabs the ball and steps out of bounds. A4 is standing about 15 feet away from B1 and uses his arms to break the plane of the baseline.

Basically, Team A is desparately trying to get called for a delay of game. It's their only chance to stop the clock and make Team B inbound the ball one more time.

The NFHS case book (9.2.10) has a comment that officials are supposed to ignore this action. I presented this to a veteran official in our area, and he was surprised it was in there. He said he would probably still whistle and call the delay.

How many of you would ignore this tactic, as instructed in the case book? Would you treat (A) and (B) differently?

Thanks for your help, as a young varsity coach I appreciate the sharing of knowledge and experience on this board.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by CoachJW

High school game, everybody is out of timeouts. There have been no delay-of-game warnings issued. Team A is down by 4 with 5 seconds left in the 4th quarter. They have a baseline OB. They inbound and A1 makes a 3-pointer. Now Team A is down by 1 point, but the clock is at about 3 seconds when the ball goes through.

(A) as soon as it goes through the net, A2 grabs it and tosses it toward the bleachers.

Or...

(B) B1 grabs the ball and steps out of bounds. A4 is standing about 15 feet away from B1 and uses his arms to break the plane of the baseline.

Basically, Team A is desparately trying to get called for a delay of game. It's their only chance to stop the clock and make Team B inbound the ball one more time.

The NFHS case book (9.2.10) has a comment that officials are supposed to ignore this action. I presented this to a veteran official in our area, and he was surprised it was in there. He said he would probably still whistle and call the delay.

How many of you would ignore this tactic, as instructed in the case book? Would you treat (A) and (B) differently?

Thanks for your help, as a young varsity coach I appreciate the sharing of knowledge and experience on this board.

A or B; I would treat the same Technical foul.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by truerookie

A or B; I would treat the same Technical foul.

Really? With no prior delay warnings? What about the case play cited in the OP that says to ignore those actions and let the clock run out?

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Really? With no prior delay warnings? What about the case play cited in the OP that says to ignore those actions and let the clock run out?

No not really!! I seen the case play. I didn't have my daily 3 mile run this morning before I posted.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by CoachJW

Now Team A is down by 1 point, but the clock is at about 3 seconds when the ball goes through.

(A) as soon as it goes through the net, A2 grabs it and tosses it toward the bleachers.

Or...

(B) B1 grabs the ball and steps out of bounds. A4 is standing about 15 feet away from B1 and uses his arms to break the plane of the baseline.

Basically, Team A is desparately trying to get called for a delay of game. It's their only chance to stop the clock and make Team B inbound the ball one more time.

The NFHS case book (9.2.10) has a comment that officials are supposed to ignore this action. I presented this to a veteran official in our area, and he was surprised it was in there. He said he would probably still whistle and call the delay.

How many of you would ignore this tactic, as instructed in the case book? Would you treat (A) and (B) differently?

The official may be a veteran but he has one heckuva lot to learn.

The FED provided us with a very explicit and germane case play that tells us exactly what to do in both (A) and (B) above. Case plays are rules. Your veteran official is telling you he would ignore the rules. That's not a good idea in this situation.

The case play was put in to deal with certain plays where a team could gain an unfair advantage not intended by the delay rules. Iow, the FED closed the loophole.

[eg-italy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The official may be a veteran but he has one heckuva lot to learn.

The FED provided us with a very explicit and germane case play that tells us exactly what to do in both (A) and (B) above. Case plays are rules. Your veteran official is telling you he would ignore the rules. That's not a good idea in this situation.

The case play was put in to deal with certain plays where a team could gain an unfair advantage not intended by the delay rules. Iow, the FED closed the loophole.

Since I don't have the rule book, would you please cite the relevant case plays?

Without knowing them, I'd say T in case (A) and ignore the act in case (B). Tossing the ball toward the bleachers would be a T even at the first minute of the game, IMO. Breaking the plane 5 meters (sorry, 15 feet ) away from the throw-in is just irrelevant: would you issue a warning during normal play? You probably wouldn't even see it.

On the other hand, I prefer the FIBA and NCAA rule: when the time is almost over, stop the clock after a basket.

Ciao

[Da Official]

I agree with and support the Case Book 100% as ALL NFHS Officials should do. (If only judges followed the law...instead of making their own laws...)

If an official looks at Page 10 of the 07-08 NFHS Rule Book he/she can read that:

"Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should the play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by the rule."


In the scenarios listed by the original post it would unfairly benefit the losing team stop the game. The casebook is clear and all officials should comply.

My 3 cents...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by eg-italy

Since I don't have the rule book, would you please cite the relevant case plays?

Case Book Play 9.2.10:..A1 is out-of-bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through the plane and knocks the ball out of A1's hands. team B has not been charged previously with for a throw-in plane violation.
RULING:..B1 is charged with a technical foul and it also results in the official having a team warning recorded and reported to the head coach.
COMMENT:--In situations with the clock running and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored if it's only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay should be called even though no previous warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic.

[eg-italy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Case Book Play 9.2.10:...
COMMENT:--In situations with the clock running and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored if it's only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay should be called even though no previous warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic.

That's just like I thought. Do you agree that tossing away the ball should be penalized with a T?

Ciao

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by eg-italy

That's just like I thought. Do you agree that tossing away the ball should be penalized with a T?

No, obviously I agree with the case play. That tells us to ignore the tossing away of the ball and just let the clock run out.

As Rainmaker said, you only issue the "T" in cases where a team actually benefits by knocking the ball away, as in the case of the team that is ahead doing that. The team behind in the score will not benefit unless you actually do stop the clock.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

The official may be a veteran but he has one heckuva lot to learn.

The FED provided us with a very explicit and germane case play that tells us exactly what to do in both (A) and (B) above. Case plays are rules. Your veteran official is telling you he would ignore the rules. That's not a good idea in this situation.

The case play was put in to deal with certain plays where a team could gain an unfair advantage not intended by the delay rules. Iow, the FED closed the loophole.

Yup let it run. "But you didn't delay the game, you just shot yourself in the packet. That's not illegal."

Just remember, though, that if it's the team that's ahead that throws the ball into the stands, that's not just a warning. We are entirely authorized to call this a T with no previous warning.

Here's a question, though: What if the person running the clock assumes you're going to call a T and stops the clock at 2.5 seconds? You stand there, counting, waiting, no horn. You look up, clock is stopped. What now?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Here's a question, though: What if the person running the clock assumes you're going to call a T and stops the clock at 2.5 seconds? You stand there, counting, waiting, no horn. You look up, clock is stopped. What now?

You use your count as official information. Declare the game over when you hit 2.5 seconds on your count. Do not stop the clock to re-set....just continue counting.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You use your count as official information. Declare the game over when you hit 2.5 seconds on your count. Do not stop the clock to re-set....just continue counting.

Alright, I like that one. Another good reason to have a visible count the last few seconds of the game.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by CoachJW

(A) as soon as it goes through the net, A2 grabs it and tosses it toward the bleachers.

I'd T him up if he tosses it INTO the bleachers!!

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by CoachJW

High school game, everybody is out of timeouts. There have been no delay-of-game warnings issued. Team A is down by 4 with 5 seconds left in the 4th quarter. They have a baseline OB. They inbound and A1 makes a 3-pointer. Now Team A is down by 1 point, but the clock is at about 3 seconds when the ball goes through.

(A) as soon as it goes through the net, A2 grabs it and tosses it toward the bleachers.

Or...

(B) B1 grabs the ball and steps out of bounds. A4 is standing about 15 feet away from B1 and uses his arms to break the plane of the baseline.

Basically, Team A is desparately trying to get called for a delay of game. It's their only chance to stop the clock and make Team B inbound the ball one more time.

The NFHS case book (9.2.10) has a comment that officials are supposed to ignore this action. I presented this to a veteran official in our area, and he was surprised it was in there. He said he would probably still whistle and call the delay.

How many of you would ignore this tactic, as instructed in the case book? Would you treat (A) and (B) differently?

Thanks for your help, as a young varsity coach I appreciate the sharing of knowledge and experience on this board.

Play (A): This is both a TF charged to A2 for delay of game and a delay of game warning to Team A. I know that I could get out of Dodge if my partners and I do not say a word and just let the clock run out. But A2's act in this case is too blantant not to ignore.

Play (B): The Casebook Play is correct. That veteran official needs to do more studying of the rules and casebook plays. If he would issue the delay of game warning he would have to stop the clock and that is just what Team A wants. He would thereby rewarding Team A for their breaking of the rules, because Team B's throw-in for Team A's violation would be with the clock stopped, and the casebook play keeps Team A from gaining an advantage they are not entitled to under the rules.

MTD, Sr.