The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16 (permalink)  
Old Mon Feb 25, 2008, 10:24pm
Lighten up, Francis.
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by MadCityRef
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
Assuming that the T was on the defensive coach, the ball remains live.What?
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?
Reply With Quote
  #17 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 08:39am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,994
Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #18 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 09:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Beaver, PA
Posts: 481
Quote:
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.
__________________
I only wanna know ...
Reply With Quote
  #19 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 09:21am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,994
Quote:
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.

Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #20 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 09:45am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 215
Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #21 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 09:50am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,994
Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #22 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 09:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 215
Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #23 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 09:58am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,994
Quote:
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.
Reply With Quote
  #24 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 10:12am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 215
Quote:
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...
Reply With Quote
  #25 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 10:55am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Beaver, PA
Posts: 481
Quote:
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.
__________________
I only wanna know ...
Reply With Quote
  #26 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 11:43am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,260
Quote:
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.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #27 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 02:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Posts: 412
Send a message via MSN to crazy voyager
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrapper1
I'm not familiar with FIBA rules, so could you explain why you'd have 3 free throws on a dead ball foul? Or maybe you're saying that the ball would not be dead? But I don't see how that could be. . . I'm not doubting you at all, I just am curious about the rationale for it. Thanks.
Becuse even though this is a dead ball, the foul is unsportmanlike. An U-foul can be called at any time (this contact could be deamed disqualifying however the penalty is the same). This means that no matter if the ball is dead or not this is an unsportsmanlike foul towards a shooter in motion. Since he is shooting for 3 he also gets 3 shots (since he missed).
Art. 36 Unsportsmanlike foul
36.1 Definition
36.1.1 An unsportsmanlike foul is a player contact foul which, in the judgement of the official, is not a legitimate attempt to directly play the ball within the spirit and intent of the rules.
36.2 Penalty
36.2.1 An unsportsmanlike foul shall be charged against the offender.
36.2.2 Free throw(s) shall be awarded to the player who was fouled, followed by:
• A throw-in at the centre line extended, opposite the scorer’s table.
• A jump ball at the centre circle to begin the first period.
The number of free throws shall be as follows:
• If the foul is committed on a player not in the act of shooting: two (2) free throws will be awarded.
• If the foul is committed on a player in the act of shooting: the goal, if made, shall count and, in addition, one (1) free throw will be awarded.
• If the foul is committed on a player in the act of shooting who fails to score: two (2) or three (3) free throws will be awarded.

I can't give you a good case for this becuse I can't find one, how ever, the key is that if there is a dead ball and there is a continious play like in this video. You ignore personal fouls due to the dead ball, but if the foul is a T, U or D then you must call it. Therefore this is an unsportmanlike foul charged on the defence, the player who were fouled will attempt 3 FT's for this foul since he was trying for 3 points.
I can't find the rules quote regarding dead ball fouls either I'm afraid... I'll keep looking though
__________________
All posts I do refers to FIBA rules
Reply With Quote
  #28 (permalink)  
Old Tue Feb 26, 2008, 09:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,994
Everything that crazyvoyager just posted above is for FIBA and does NOT apply to NFHS or NCAA. Those rules are completely different. So for any NFHS or NCAA officials, we must ignore everything that he wrote. Doesn't mean that he is wrong, he's just working under a different system.

For starters the contact foul would NOT be an unsporting foul in NFHS play. By definition an unsporting foul is a noncontact foul under NFHS rules.

Secondly, once the ball is dead a try for goal cannot be started. Therefore, the contact could only be deemed an intentional technical foul or a flagrant technical foul and would result in only 2 FTs.

Lastly to answer Camron's question, I believe that only an incompetent official would deem this action a common foul. It is clearly excessive contact.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:55am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1