Erroneous info

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

The difference is that "all players" particiapte in the throw-in -- so this example is more like part (c) of the case play.

If an official says "2 shots", then s/he is preparing for two shots and it's going to take a second or two to realize why only one person attempted to rebound the basketball. During that time, I think the whistle can be sounded and we can go to the arrow -- even if the ball has passed through the basket.

No, I don't know exactly where the "line" is between correcting the error (and I don't mean to imply 2-10 with that phrase) and letting it go. Certainly, once the subsequent throw-in is complete it's too late. IMO, before the subsequent throw-in has started, it's not too late. During the subsequent throw-in???? (probably too late -- again, especially if all players are actively participating in the play).

And, I'll argue that this is the "spirit and intent" of the rule, and not what others have said in this thread.

I with you bob....I was thinking last night of the same idea but for some reason couldn't come up with words I liked ( and didn't post ).

In my game, I'm considering the ball dead on the miss of the first shot after I annouce 2 shots if only 1 player plays the ball... It doesn't matter if it is my error or the tables.

[just another ref]

Apparently my "confusion" is shared by Bob and Camron. Nothing like being in good company.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Apparently my "confusion" is shared by Bob and Camron. Nothing like being in good company.

Yeah. I am a bit surprised all 3 of you guys are wrong.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

If an official says "2 shots", then s/he is preparing for two shots and it's going to take a second or two to realize why only one person attempted to rebound the basketball. During that time, I think the whistle can be sounded and we can go to the arrow -- even if the ball has passed through the basket.

No, I don't know exactly where the "line" is between correcting the error (and I don't mean to imply 2-10 with that phrase) and letting it go. Certainly, once the subsequent throw-in is complete it's too late. IMO, before the subsequent throw-in has started, it's not too late. During the subsequent throw-in???? (probably too late -- again, especially if all players are actively participating in the play).

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I with you bob....I was thinking last night of the same idea but for some reason couldn't come up with words I liked ( and didn't post ).

In my game, I'm considering the ball dead on the miss of the first shot after I annouce 2 shots if only 1 player plays the ball... It doesn't matter if it is my error or the tables.

Guys, need I remind you that it's not YOUR game. Your personal philosophy doesn't matter. As a game official your duty is to enforce the NFHS rules as written. The NFHS issued a POE about not putting your personal opinions and philosophies into administering the game. The committee stated that doing so was detrimental to the game. Just because you don't like the way that the rule is written doesn't mean that you can alter it.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Guys, need I remind you that it's not YOUR game. Your personal philosophy doesn't matter. As a game official your duty is to enforce the NFHS rules as written. The NFHS issued a POE about not putting your personal opinions and philosophies into administering the game. The committee stated that doing so was detrimental to the game. Just because you don't like the way that the rule is written doesn't mean that you can alter it.

Your personal philosophy doesn't matter either. We have different opinion of what the rule as written is intended to say. You apparently are certain that you are right. We see it differently. Why the condescending attitude?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Guys, need I remind you that it's not YOUR game. Your personal philosophy doesn't matter. As a game official your duty is to enforce the NFHS rules as written. The NFHS issued a POE about not putting your personal opinions and philosophies into administering the game. The committee stated that doing so was detrimental to the game. Just because you don't like the way that the rule is written doesn't mean that you can alter it.

Okay, I'll modify my post to say, "The FED rules and case plays clearly indicate that the official can correct the misinformation and anyone suggesting otherwise is inserting his or her own opinion into the game."

Better?