Rule Question: Offensive 3 Seconds

[RangeGunner]

Yesterday, I was playing in a game. One of my teammates was caught under the basket with the ball. He threw a pass that hit a defenders head and bounced back to him. He caught the ball and the ref called 3 seconds.

After the game, the other ref agreed with the call saying that the offensive player never lost possession because no one else had gained it. Thus, when he got the ball back, it was a 3 seconds.This ref said it was high school and college rules.

Was the call correct?

[zebraman]

By rule, the official was correct. Team control has not ended just because the ball hit the opponent.

[Scrapper1]

The offensive player did lose possession, but that's not really the issue. The reason that it was a violation is that the team never lost team control. When a player of the team in control is in the lane for three seconds and there is team control for that entire time (and the ball is in the frontcourt), it's a violation.

Even for people who say that this should only be called when there is a clear advantage, I think this would be a violation, as the player got the ball right back with an easy chance for a basket.

[Adam]

What my esteemed colleagues are trying to say is, "Yes."

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

What my esteemed colleagues are trying to say is, "Yes."

Do esteemed colleagues automatically also have esteemed members?

.....next on Gerry Springer.....

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

The offensive player did lose possession, but that's not really the issue. The reason that it was a violation is that the team never lost team control. When a player of the team in control is in the lane for three seconds and there is team control for that entire time (and the ball is in the frontcourt), it's a violation.

Even for people who say that this should only be called when there is a clear advantage, I think this would be a violation, as the player got the ball right back with an easy chance for a basket.

Sooo.. just so we're clear...

Are you definitely saying this is a violation? And that you yourself would personally call it? Or maybe call it sometimes depending on whether it's a 1 on 0 fast break or it's not outside your primary...? Or some other dependencies we might not be privy to right now...phase of the moon perhaps?

Enquiring minds do want to know.

It's true.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Do esteemed colleagues automatically also have esteemed members?

.....next on Gerry Springer.....

Not necessarily. And, in Colorado, that will soon no longer dictate whether they use the "members" restroom or the "other" one.