What do we have here?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Once the shooter starts the motion for the try, continuous motion applies and the ball remains live if there is a foul committed by the defense. Right?

True, but that's not what happened here. The coach clearly misbehaves before the act of shooting begins. That's the foul which makes the ball dead.

[Ref in PA]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

True, but that's not what happened here. The coach clearly misbehaves before the act of shooting begins. That's the foul which makes the ball dead.

That is a matter of judgement by the ref. The ref will have to sort the sequence of when the foul occurred in relationship to the play on the floor. I will not deny there seems to be an argument for you case, however, by the time the signal is started by the ref, the shooter is clearly in the act. In fact, the shot is away before the ref completes the signal.

As to whether or not the contact was flagrant ... again judgment call. I think if the physicality of the game had been escalating up to this point, I think I would toss the defensive player. If this play was out of character for the game, then I can see calling the intentional foul.

Regardless, I am going to huddle with my partners, sort everything out, then give explanations to both coaches and get on with the game.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

That is a matter of judgement by the ref.

I was going by what the tape shows. Purely an objective statement.

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

The ref will have to sort the sequence of when the foul occurred in relationship to the play on the floor. I will not deny there seems to be an argument for you case, however, by the time the signal is started by the ref, the shooter is clearly in the act. In fact, the shot is away before the ref completes the signal.

Who cares when the signal is given? That's not the determining factor. It's when the act occurs.

[Ref in PA]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Who cares when the signal is given? That's not the determining factor. It's when the act occurs.

I agree completely. I only pointed out the signal, because we are observers of a tape. My comment was about you saying the infraction "clearly" happens before the shot. To me, it is not that crystal clear when the T occurs. I was merely pointing out what I saw on the tape that cause doubt in my mind to your absolute statement. What was black and white to you was not so clear-cut to me.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

I agree completely. I only pointed out the signal, because we are observers of a tape. My comment was about you saying the infraction "clearly" happens before the shot. To me, it is not that crystal clear when the T occurs. I was merely pointing out what I saw on the tape that cause doubt in my mind to your absolute statement. What was black and white to you was not so clear-cut to me.

You are correct. From the video we have, we can only tell when the signal occurs. We can not tell when the T itself occurs. It MAY be with the waving of the arms but it may be for words that followed the arm movements but are not discernable on the video.

As for the contact... It is certainly not flagrant. If we ignore the T for a moment, how many would call that contact intentional had it occurred in isolation. I'm sure there are a few, and perhaps several, here that would only call a common foul. It is arguable that the contact could be ignored if the ball is dead.

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by Ref in PA

by the time the signal is started by the ref, the shooter is clearly in the act. In fact, the shot is away before the ref completes the signal.

Agree with previous poster. Signal/whistle has nothing to do with this at all. Our whistle is only there to tell the timer to stop the clock, and our hand signals are a visual cue for the benefit of everybody to know what's going on.

For sake of argument, let's say the coach dropped the f-bomb on the trail in the video. Trail raises hand, blows whistle, T-signal. Now trail has to determine whether or not shooting motion started before f-bomb. If I were trail in this case, and that was the defensive coach, it appears in the video as though some kind of shot was immenent, so I'd hold off for a second for the offense to get a shot, wait to see if it goes - to avoid any timing confusion, then blow my whistle and bang him with a T. If that coach is on the offense, I blow my whistle immediately, wave off the shot, and throw the T.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

Agree with previous poster. Signal/whistle has nothing to do with this at all. Our whistle is only there to tell the timer to stop the clock, and our hand signals are a visual cue for the benefit of everybody to know what's going on.

For sake of argument, let's say the coach dropped the f-bomb on the trail in the video. Trail raises hand, blows whistle, T-signal. Now trail has to determine whether or not shooting motion started before f-bomb. If I were trail in this case, and that was the defensive coach, it appears in the video as though some kind of shot was immenent, so I'd hold off for a second for the offense to get a shot, wait to see if it goes - to avoid any timing confusion, then blow my whistle and bang him with a T. If that coach is on the offense, I blow my whistle immediately, wave off the shot, and throw the T.

According to the case book that is exactly what you are supposed to do when the opposing team offends during a scoring play.

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

According to the case book that is exactly what you are supposed to do when the opposing team offends during a scoring play.

Phew...good to know I'm doing the right thing. If you blow the whistle right away, I see it as penalizing the offense for the stupidity of a defensive coach. True, they are getting 2 shots and the ball, but it's not like T's are accidentally earned. Good basket...2 shots...ball at mid-court...maybe that'll teach the coach to shut up next time.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ma_ref

Phew...good to know I'm doing the right thing. If you blow the whistle right away, I see it as penalizing the offense for the stupidity of a defensive coach. True, they are getting 2 shots and the ball, but it's not like T's are accidentally earned. Good basket...2 shots...ball at mid-court...maybe that'll teach the coach to shut up next time.

Yep, here's the citation:

WITHHOLD WHISTLE
10.4.1 SITUATION E: A1 is driving toward the basket for an apparent goal when the official, while trailing the play advancing in the direction in which the ball is being advanced, is cursed by the head coach of Team B. How should the official handle this situation? RULING: The official shall withhold blowing the whistle until A1 has either made or missed the shot. The official shall then sound the whistle and assess the Team B head coach with a technical foul. If the official judges the act to be flagrant, the coach shall be ejected and shall leave the vicinity of the playing area and have no further contact (direct or indirect) with the team. If A's coach was the offender, the whistle shall be sounded immediately when the unsporting act occurs.

[ma_ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yep, here's the citation:

Thanks for the casebook entry. I actually got fooled by this during my 2nd year of officiating. I was working a summer AAU tournament, don't remember the score, but I think it must've been close at the time. Team A is in their front court passing the ball around, B1 steals the ball from A1, and is on a breakaway towards the basket for an easy lay-up. Coach from A1 starts screaming at me about why I didn't call a foul on the steal and wouldn't let up, so I hit him with a T...before B1 had a chance to score. After the game, the coach comes up to me and with a sly grin tells me "No hard feelings about the T...I just didn't want that kid to get the easy 2 points." Fortunately that basket didn't matter 1 way or the other, but man did I feel foolish because he tricked me...Oh well, live and learn I suppose...