Disconcertion or not?
 

I had a play at the free throw line. I was the trail and the defender was standing directly behind the free thrower during a two shot free throw. I could see his lips moving, but really couldnt hear him say anything. After the first attempt, I made him back off and move from behind the thrower. Is there any kind of rule about this? I know about the disconcertion rule, but what about being directly behind the thrower???

As long as the non shooting player is behind the 3pt line and above the FT line the player can legally stand anywhere on the floor for the most part. As the official you are however allowed to tell the player to move if you think the player is attempting to distract the shooter. I wouldn't call disconcertion unless I know for certain the player is distracting the shooter.

Yeah, that was my point. So I made him move and didnt call the disconcertion on the first try. I couldnt verify that we was actually saying anything.

I would have given a warning and then listened very carefully during next free throw. I would not have moved the defender though.

-----------------------------------------
Rob, give me a holla at my work number.

It was a heated game and I didnt want anything stupid to happen....preventive officiating!!!

What was your "rules" basis for moving the player from his legal location outside the 3 point line and above the free throw line extended?

If you look at Rule #2, Section 3 - The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules......I made a decision that I felt was warrented due to the nature of the game......

Preventive officiating is not telling a player that he can't do something that's legal. Your 2-3 reference is BS, since the rules state that he can stand there. You can't use 2-3 to justify everything you don't like.

If he's disconcerting, call it.

If you don't know, then you either move closer so you can make the call or you preventive officiating by warning him not to disconcert the shooter.

But you have no authority to tell him he can't stand there.

Sorry, you can be defensive if you want to but there's no rule basis for what you did. It was wrong.

But it is specifically "covered". The "location" is defined in the rules and "disconcerting" is defined. The player was in a legal location and you stated that you were unable to determine if he "disconcerted" the free thrower.

You could warn him and closely observe him but you had no authority to move him.

Thats your opinion....In the game we had it was warrented. I just asked him politely to move from behind that shooter and I am not using 2-3 to justify everything. It was my call and I will stand by it. Thanks for your input.

Agree. Those are your only choices, by rule. Warn/call.

What rule <b>did</b> you use to justify it?:confused:

I used 2-3, but i guess I was wrong according to everyone here. Its evident that I dont have the "authority" to tell the players to do anything......thanks for everyones responses and input.

You obviously can tell a player whatever you like.

Just as obviously you do not have the authority to make them obey you on matters outside of the rules.

Then what?
 

Suppose the kid was a rule book junkie and he knew he was within the rules to stand behind the shooter and refused to move. What would be your course of action then?

Point taken.......thanks everyone......

As stated in my earlier response, I would have not told the player he had to move. But seeing as I am very familiar with the environment in which IREFU2 was officiating this game I can understand why he did what he did.

It may have been the wrong decision but it was for the right reasons.

I had the same thing once and t'd him
 

The difference is I did hear what he said, something like, "you know you can't make that shot." Tech foul, unsporting conduct, taunting.

Two questions.

What are the right reasons?

What do you do if he doesn't move?

Call a Technical foul on the player. :eek: Even though the officials directive to move was not founded by rule, the player should still follow the official's instruction. Failure to obey an official's instruction can be construed as unsportsmanlike conduct and thus worthy of a T. I know this ruling will probably not be met with alot of support, but I've seen it upheld.

The following example happened to a buddy of mine. During a 1-1 situation, he thought they were shooting two and as such he told A6 that he had to wait until after the first shot. A6 then turned to his coach who told him to go ahead and sub in. This was met with a T from my friend. Team A ended up losing by 1 point (B made both of the technical FT's). Although the FT's were in the 2nd quarter, Coach A made stink about how that cost his team the game. He took his case to the OSSAA and they informed him that while the official had made a mistake in not allowing the substitution, the resulting T was still correct as the player had not been properly beckoned onto the court. As such the comparison can be made to this situation that while the official was wrong, so was the player for disobeying the order to move.

Whoever upheld it hasn't got a clue when it comes to the rules.

You're advocating calling a technical foul on a player for doing something that is perfectly <b>legal</b> by rule? What's wrong with that picture?

Good luck with that.....:)

Terrible advice imo.

A player can't enter unless beckoned. It's a T to do so. It has nothing to do with the official's mistake. That's why the OSSAA backed the official, not because he told the player to do something that was legal to do. But according to you, it's a T because he did something unsporting. Simply not true.

I'm not suggesting this is the route that I would take by any means. I'm just making the point that in essense the ruling was that even though the official is in error, a resulting call that is correct (such as a the T) is upheld. I'm humble enough to realize that I'm going to make a mistake or two on the court, and when I do I still have to enforce the rest of the rules as required. If an official is in error about a rule the players don't get the authority to just defy an official even if what they are doing is legal.

Like I said, I'm not going to get into this situation because I wouldn't be moving the player in the OP, but an incorrect ruling doesn't suspend an officials authority.

He was legitmately concerned that the player was saying something that would instigate a fight.

As I said, I would not have told the player to move. I would have given a very stern reminder about disconcertion prior to the 2nd free throw.