In the UConn – SIU game Friday, one play had me wondering…

During one trip down the court, A1 received a pass and had his back to the defender. B1 ran up behind him, stepped on the back of A1's shoe, and bumped him from behind. A1, taking a step forward because of the contact, stepped out of his shoe. B1 was standing on the heel. No-call...

I know I wouldn't normally stop a game because a player lost a shoe. But I do believe I'd have a whistle in this case. The actions of B1 placed A1 at a very distinct disadvantage that couldn't be easily rectified. Then, because of the no-call, play continued, placing team A at a disadvantage. At a minimum, I expected a "hold" or even a "push."

I was wondering if I missed something here. Did anyone see this play?

And how bout' them SIU Salukis? The dawgs just didn't have the perimeter shot. I guess not everyone showed up ready to play...watch for us in another decade. And Coach Weber says he's gonna stay next year. We’ll see.

I did not see the game, but if there was a shoe on the floor in the middle of the paint with players moving quickly through the lane, I would stop the game, using the same principles for stopping the game when a player's glasses come off or a player becomes injured.

WHOA!!!!! MAKE UP YOUR MIND!!

One minute you are telling us that you would not stop the game (even if the ball was dead and in the official's hand) if a shoe is untied, but you WILL stop a live ball play just because a shoe comes off of a foot?

And no, it is not the same as an injury, and I don't think that the shoe will become broken to a point where it can't be worn after replacement at the next legitimate stoppage of play.

Bigwhistle, Its funny, i thought about saying something, but i choose not to. And here you go and make the comparison. You just had to start trouble, didn't you?

We all have a bad day.
 

Fellas,
Mark T. may just be in a little slump today.
He'll come out of it.
mick

come on guys i am ROTFWL. Mark, i would come to your defense but i know you can handle it. :)

I can't see that the player with the ball stepping out of a shoe that is being held in place by a defender is the same as a loose shoe rolling around anywhere on the floor. But a loose shoe IS undoubtedly a danger, as is a player in one sock foot.

But none of that is the same as an untied shoelace. DeNucci's point is that players should keep their laces tied, and if they don't, it's their own lookout. That is in no way comparable to a guy getting his shoe removed from his foot involuntarily.

I've taken a shot or two at Mark De in my time, but I don't think he deserves this one!

If player's are supposed to keep their shoes tied, When are they supposed to tie them if they become untied? Since you will not allow time for them to tie them on the court. Would you rather see a sub come in for that player, which will take the same amount of time if you stop and let the player tie his shoe during a dead ball. I don't understand the Logic in not allowing a player to take a few seconds and tie his shoe. This allows you as an official to make conversation with a player. I can't believe that a simple untied shoe is breaking the rules.

I am being consistent. Team A has control of the ball in its front court. A1 is the midcourt area when his shoe comes off. A1 can stop what he is doing and put his shoe on. In the posted play, A1's opponent used nefarious means to pull A1's shoe off during play in the lane. While this is all happening a shot goes up in the lane, there are at least five or six players in the lane going after the rebound. One or more of these players could step on A1's shoe and possibly get hurt. This is not different if instead of A1's shoe being on the floor, A1's eye glasses or hearing aid could be on the floor. This situation is not even close to being like A1's shoe coming off while he is out in the midcourt area.

I gotta ask.
 

Mark T.,
How did you determine this? <li>Logic<li>Common Sense<li>Rule

:)
mick

Re: I gotta ask.
 

Read my post of 7:59pm.

Re: Re: I gotta ask.
 

Yeah, I did. That's why I had to ask. A shoe in the lane is like the eyeglass rule? I don't follow, but then, I'm old.
Since there is no shoe rule and you don't like common sense, does that leave logic?
mick

Mark, Its rare to see eye glasses and hearing aids. If they have eyeglasses, they are durable. I wouldn't stop play if a players eyeglasses or hearing aid was on the floor. As far as the danger of another player getting injured, not much different than a player down on the floor during rebounding. As i have said, during a dead ball, i will allow tieing of shoes, tuck shirts in, clean glasses, put in contacts, fix the hair tie, etc.

You guys are something!
 

Some of you guys crack me up!
Why not just use common sense and if
you are going to err, err on the side
of caution and protection.
Glasses can be broken, (maybe not replaced)
players can fall over them and could easily get hurt with a shoe in the lane.
If ANYTHING is remotely dangerous, STOP THE GAME!

Are you kidding: "Its rare to see eye glasses"

At least three or four times a year (roughly 350 games per every twelve months), I have a situation where a player has his/her glasses come off or a lense gets popped out of the frame.

And to withhold the ball from play to allow a player to tie shoelaces, tuck shirts into shorts, clean glasses or fix a hair tie is flat out against the rules. If a player wants to do that they can do it anytime he/she desires, if the player wants the game to stop for that purpose, the player had better be prepared to request a timeout. Replacing a contact is another matter because it is covered by rule.