Coach told us about puzzling call from other game

[Mark Padgett]

Last night, before our game started, one of the coaches came over and asked about a rule interpretation. He said that in their last game (NF rules), they wanted to get called for a delay of game warning after a basket to stop the clock. When the other team grabbed the ball and stepped OOB, his player put one foot OOB to break the plane. The official did nothing. So his player put both feet OOB and just stood there with his hands up.

To the coach's credit, he knew that if the official felt they were doing it intentionally to gain an advantage, he is supposed to ignore it. However, he said the official called a technical on his team for having only four players on the court during a live ball! The coach said he'd never heard of that before and besides, if that was true, the other team had only four on the "court" also because the inbounder was OOB.

We both scratched our heads (our own, not each other's) and said there must have been something else going on. We really had no explanation, but we assured him that if the same situation came up in our game, that would not be our call.

Anybody have any idea what might have happened to cause such a call, giving the official the benefit of the doubt that he didn't just make something up?

[bgtg19]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

We both scratched our heads (our own, not each other's)

I hope you were scratching your head because of your dandruff and not because you were questioning your officiating colleague in front of your coach pal....

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

1) To the coach's credit, he knew that if the official felt they were doing it intentionally to gain an advantage, he is supposed to ignore it.

2) However, he said the official called a technical on his team for having only four players on the court during a live ball! The coach said he'd never heard of that before and besides, if that was true, the other team had only four on the "court" also because the inbounder was OOB.

1) He was doing it intentionally to gain an advantage. So it's a T. He knew that. Is he questioning the verbiage used to justify the T? Not worth wondering about, IMO. The penalty for his kid is a T, and that's what he got.

2) The other team only had 4 on the court because one of them was out of bounds for an authorized reason -- a throw-in.

Silly monkey.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Anybody have any idea what might have happened to cause such a call, giving the official the benefit of the doubt that he didn't just make something up?

Leaving the court for an unauthorized reason?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Leaving the court for an unauthorized reason?

That's a violation, not a T.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

1) He was doing it intentionally to gain an advantage. So it's a T. He knew that. Is he questioning the verbiage used to justify the T? Not worth wondering about, IMO. The penalty for his kid is a T, and that's what he got.

2) The other team only had 4 on the court because one of them was out of bounds for an authorized reason -- a throw-in.

Silly monkey.

What rule are going to issue the "T" under, Skippy? You can't use 10-3-3 because the defender was never legally OOB. You don't want to use 9-3-3 and call a violation on the defense because that call will give the defense the unfair advantage that they wanted. You might be able to use 10-3-6(a), but if the defender OOB isn't interfering with the thrower or the throw-in, I can't see how that would be applicable either.

As far as I can see, the only possible choices are a "T" under 10-3-6(a) if he interferes with the throw-in or thrower in any way, or a delay warning under 9-2-10 if he's just standing OOB. Unless we know whether the defender actually interfered with the throw-in/thrower or not, we can't really tell which call was appropriate.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

As far as I can see, the only possible choices are a "T" under 10-3-6(a) if he interferes with the throw-in or thrower in any way,

I guess I was assuming this was the case. I guess he could've been standing out of bounds 20 feet away, but it didn't sound like that. Sounded like he was right in front of or next to the inbounder. In which case, it seems like an easy T to me.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

As far as I can see, the only possible choices are a "T" under 10-3-6(a) if he interferes with the throw-in or thrower in any way

That's not the intent of that rule. He wasn't "preventing the ball from being made live promptly" since it was live when the inbounder had it. If you interpret the rest of the rule, "preventing.......from being put in play" you'd have to T everyone who used good defense to prevent an inbound pass. This rule has to do with interfering with the other teams right to start the inbound process.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

That's not the intent of that rule. He wasn't "preventing the ball from being made live promptly" since it was live when the inbounder had it. If you interpret the rest of the rule, "preventing.......from being put in play" you'd have to T everyone who used good defense to prevent an inbound pass. This rule has to do with interfering with the other teams right to start the inbound process.

If the defender goes OOB and interferes in any way with the throw-in, you can justify handing out a "T" under 10-3-6(a) imo. The defender can be OOB though and not interfere with the thrower or throw-in. As Skippy said, that's the case if he's OOB 20 feet away from the thrower. In that situation, I don't think you have the rules backing to call a "T". I can't think of a rule that will allow you to issue one anyway.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If the defender goes OOB and interferes in any way with the throw-in, you can justify handing out a "T" under 10-3-6(a) imo. The defender can be OOB though and not interfere with the thrower or throw-in. As Skippy said, that's the case if he's OOB 20 feet away from the thrower. In that situation, I don't think you have the rules backing to call a "T". I can't think of a rule that will allow you to issue one anyway.

I think I could live with 10-3-7(c) [Bait, taunt]
The coach ne'er tol' Padgett that the Big kid, the Mean kid, while holding the ball was saying (or looked like he was thinking), "You want it? Then come git it!"

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If the defender goes OOB and interferes in any way with the throw-in, you can justify handing out a "T" under 10-3-6(a) imo.

Sorry, JR, gotta respectfully disagree. That's just not the way I read the rule. Maybe we can arm wrestle for it.

[JM_00]

you cant use 10-6-3a in this play. It state to prevent the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play.

Isn't the ball already live as per 6-1-2b.

Unless you want to get really picky with the definition on "in play"

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by JM_00

Unless you want to get really picky with the definition on "in play"

Um, yeah, actually that's kinda what I've been referring to all along when I said if the defender was interfering with the thrower or throw-in.

[JM_00]

Sorry JR, I guess now that I re-read your full post above, I fully agree with you...

So I'll pull my head out of my rear, and go work on trying to overcome my illiteracy problem