Well fellow lords of the hooplands, here is one that I saw durng a playoff game that caused some debate but as it had no outcome on the game it was quickly forgotten.

The play- Team A is inbounding the ball from under their basket, a shot from the deep corner results in an airball, but low and behold A-2 gets the rebound with .2 seconds and puts up a shot right before the buzzer goes off...the lay-up is in but is does the shot count?

That's an easy one!
 

If the ball was released prior to the horn, it's good. The 3/10ths rule only applies to situations where play is resumed with a FT or throw-in.

The score was not allowed-

Okay.
Why not?
Was it released late?
That's the only possible reason to negate it.
I hope they didn't base it on 5-2-5.

I beleive that was the reasoning, released late

If it was released late, that's fine.
But the 0:00.2 really has no bearing on the play.

BKBRef,

I'm not questioning your rules interpretation, necessarily. But I do think that the situation deserves some thought. I have two in this case.

The first is, how is it that an official on the floor can be looking up at the clock and at the shooter and know with certainty that the seemingly-light-speed-moving tenths counter read two when the shooter secured the ball?

That said, now I'll move to what I think is a more important point. The rule that you state was inappropriately applied was put in because some rules committee member(s) became persuaded (how I do not know)that it is not possible to catch the ball and shoot it in less than three tenths of a second. If this is indeed true--and common sense has me leaning toward the negative, but that's another issue--then why should it matter whether the play occurred on a throw-in or free throw, or during the course of 'normal' play? If the rules say that it's not legal (presumably because it's not possible) in one situation, then why would the reasoning change under a different hypothetical?

jb

It has to do with "reaction time".

The rules committee had to come up with a time, and .3 seems to be what they decided was a fair time to have so that the timer could not give an unfair advantage to the shooter after a FT or Throw in.

If the clock is already running...the timer has no input as to weather the try can be made with .3 seconds or less.
Count the goal!

RD

Uh, not quite.

Basically, an end of game try happened at the end of an NBA game where there was a huge clock lag. The NBA conducted experiments and said that it was humanly impossible to have a try after a throw-in with 3/10ths or less.

Uh, not quite.
A tap is a try.

Sorry - can't have a catch-and-shoot with with 3/10 or less.

So my question stands. If a catch-and-shoot is impossible in .3 seconds on an in-bounds play or off of a free throw, then how can it be possible at other times? The more i think about it, the more I disagree with BKBRef's interpretation. He conceded the point that there was .2 remaining on the clock at the time of the catch, but said that the basket should be allowed to count anyway. i think the reason that there is no case-book play on this is because it is only by replay that you'd be able to know exactly how much time, in tenths of a second, remain on the clock at any given point. I am inclined to believe that in the sitch that started this thread, that the C or T who made the ruling was right to count the basket, and also that there was more than .2 left when the player rebounded/picked up the ball for a non-tip-try. The connections between the eyes and the brain are simply not quick enough to tell exactly what's on the clock.

How about this claim? There's no case-book play for this situation, and there doesn't need to be.

jb

duke,
you are asking a redundant question. how are we or anyone else not at the game able to answer this question without speculation?
if there had been an exact point of reference(ie. the clock was stopped and started on the try)we could be of help. you are asking us if the shot should be counted good or no good. if the clock was running and the try was in fact released before time expired then the officials missed it. if the release happened after the horn then they were correct.
hoopsy stated "a2 gets the rebound with .2 sec on the clock and puts up a shot right before the buzzer goes off."
this answers any question on the play. good or no good? apparently good, but the officials missed it because they did not score the basket. it happens when their is not a monitor to go to. now i am being redundant, sorry.
a majority of the time officials do not have the ability to look at the clock and the shooter at the same time. most officials use the baseball theory(ie look at the bag and listen for the slap of the glove). the only way for us to know the exact expiration of time and release is to have the red light behind the backboard and good angle to see the light.

the nc2a theory is .3 or less only a tap could score a goal.
the nba theory is with .2 or less only a tap could be scored for goal.(mark dexter im not trying to step on toes or be a wise a$$)

How about this claim?This situation is covered in the rulebook,and it definitely needs to be.It's how we rule whether a basket is good or not at the end of a period.The NFHS reference is R6-7-6 plus Exception #1.The NCAA mens reference is R6-6-1b.BktBallRef gave you the correct answer according to the rules in his very first post.Crew also expanded on it and gave you the correct interpretation of what probably happened on the play.It's a simple play.If the ball is out of the shooter's hands when the horn goes,the basket counts.If it's not out of the shooter's hands when the horn goes,you don't count it.That covers all trys,including tips,in all rulesets.

When you have a last-second shot after a clock stoppage, everyone can see that there is either 0.3, 0.2, 0.1, or 0.0 seconds left on the clock. If the situation comes up during a running clock, the officials should not be concentrating on the clock, but should instead be looking at the hands to see if the shot was before/after the horn (if the shot is off at 0.4, it's going to take that long to look for the shooter's hands, and you won't know whether the shot was before/after the horn.)

Humanly impossible? So they don't count Dennis Rodman, eh?

You answered your second question with your first question. With play going on while the clock is running, it's impossible for an official to look at a player, the ball, and the clock and determine when the player got the ball and released it. That's why the 3/10ths rule only applies to situations where the clock is stopped at 3/10ths or less.

Also, I did not concede that there was only .2 seconds on the clock when the player got the ball. As you stated, there's no way an official can look at the clock and know exactly when a player got the ball. I simply stated that if the ball was released prior to the horn, the basket is good. There's no disputing that statement.

It has very little to do with reaction time. It's simply that the rules committee determined that a player could not catch and shoot a ball with only .3 second left. 3/10ths allows us to know that a catch and shoot isn't possible, no matter what happens to the clock.

Not quite.

The NBA rule is 2/10ths or less. 3/10ths means that a catch and shoot is possible.

"NO LESS THAN :00.3 must expire on the game clock when a player secures possession of an inbounds pass and then attempts a field goal. If less than :00.3 remain on the game clock when this situation occurs, the period is over, and the field goal attempt will be disallowed immediately whether successful or unsuccessful.

In the original sitch, some situation occurred that resulted in Team A being awarded a throw-in. The play then resulted in a throw-in to a player in the corner, a catch, clock starting, and then a try. It was an airball. Rebound to A-2. A try by A-2. The only question here is whether the ball was out of A-2's hands prior to whatever time was left when the throw-in began expiring. The 0:00.2 is irrelevant in this situation. The officials on the floor have to simply determine whether the ball was clearly in flight or not. If it was, they goofed. If it wasn't, good call on disallowing the basket. The 0:00.2 only matters if that is what was on the clock when play was to be resumed by the throw-in. It is obvious from the situation that there was more than that amount of time on the clock when the throw-in began.

Your remarks are correct, with the exception that it would also matter if the clock was stopped at 0:00.2 during a FT.

Here's another twist to the NBA rule.
with 0.1 left, a basket resulting from a TAP can only
be awarded if the tap was immediately ADJACENT to the rim!

Drake, they actually changed that interpretation. Joe said that a tap is a tap is a tap, which means it can be scored from anywhere on the court with .1 or .2 left. I know you saw that in the books though. Hopefully, they will have that corrected in next year's version.

Thanks Eli.
I actually had that happen in a scrimmage I was working
with Gary Z a couple of years ago. The ball was inbounded and tapped around the free throw line, went in, and I'm ready to count it and Z waves it off.
I did see why they had that rule. A tap further out on the floor, take more "control" (loosely interpreted) than a tap at the rim. But hey, if Joe says a tap is a tap is a tap,
so be it.:)
Thanks again for the update. Our Pro-Am is starting soon and
that info will be helpful.

Drake,
What's the Pro-Am?
Sounds fun.
How do you get selected?
From where are the players coming?
What do Officials get paid?
Thanks.
mick

Mick,
What's your record for consecutive questions asked?;)
Anyway, it's a Summer league made up of mostly College
players. We do get some Pros however. Andre Miller, Mike Doleac, Keith Vanhorn. Mostly guys with local ties.
Gary Zielinski, who is now in the NBA, started it in our area about 8 years ago.
We play by NBA rules, and have a very small pool of officials to chose from.
In Utah, there have been repercussions in the past for High School guys working our league. Many have been told "stay away from that Pro-Am." I don't know why you wouldn't want your officials reffing the best ball in the city during the Summer. I quess improvement isn't high on their list of priorities. So we have a core croup of guys who have either worked Pro ball or been to Pro-style camps, (C2C, Hue Hollins etc,)
We are always looking for new officials, but I don't know that the 20$ game fee would make it worth a trip from the U.P.;)
We use three-man mechanics, and the Gym we play in is only an 84' floor, so unless you do 4 games a night, it's not too taxing. But still a great way to stay in shape in the Summer.
We had another league start up to try and compete the last couple of years, but it was more of a run and gun league,
and the guys were not very dependable.
The guy running the league didn't want to forfeit games, so we would start 1/2 hour to 45 minutes late sometimes. Other times he would let teams "borrow" guys that were just hanging around to fill out a team for the night. It folded after about 6 games last year.
Anyway, thats the lowdown.

Thanks, Drake,
No, I wasn't fishin' for an invitation regardless of the money. ;) In fact, I may be fishing during the league's season... mighty fine walleyes, smallmouths, and Northern pike U.P. here, not to mention Lake Superior's Lake trout.

Sounds like a pretty good time if the league can keep some order.
Keep smiling. :)
mick

I can smell the grill cookin' now! AAHHHHH!!:D