Sigh ...
 

It was my worst call of the season. All my other calls, and noncalls, were perfectly correct (in my dreams).

Here's the whole, sad, story:

http://forum.officiating.com/showthr...ighlight=punch

I had this kid in a game the other day. I called him for dribbling too low. :p

http://www.davidphoto.ca/media/portr...dren/drool.jpg

As a coach I don't know which I hate worse, a coach that begs for a violation of a high dribble or an official who gives it to him.

How quickly we forget the guiding principles on the first page of the rules...knowing the purpose of a rule so it can be intelligently applied...not allowing a team an advantage not intended by rule.

Can you tell me what the intent and purpose of this rule is? If not, you might want to consider some more thinking before you blow the whistle.

Those statements on the first page of the rule book tell me that the rules in the block are not actually black and white. It tells me and every other official that there is a reason for each rule and they should be applied accordingly...not blindly.

Camron,
I'm at a loss as to what point you are trying to make, but I certainly can tell you the intent and purpose of the rule against striking the ball with a closed fist. It's player safety. Quite simply the NFHS does not want players making a fist and taking swings on the court. The intent of the player may well be to strike the ball, but if he misses or another player jumps in the way and he clocks him we very likely have an injury. So the NFHS deemed that it was unsafe to attempt to play the ball in this manner and banned it. Even if there is no one around the official has a duty to penalize this action when done so that the players learn that it is unacceptable and don't get in the habit of doing it. The danger must be stamped out of the game.

Well said.

I've never seen it done, although I've seen a defender try it in a crowd. She missed the ball and hit the ball handler in the chest. I had a perfect angle, and think I had a very good read on her intent. I called the foul and started straight for her coach (AAU game).

He's whining the whole way about making that "ticky-tack" call after letting stuff go that he'd wanted me to call. I stopped him when I got there and told him what happened, and that I didn't want to hear anything from him the rest of the game (he was a real chirper). He could tell I was pissed, and he didn't say a word to me except for "Timeout" the rest of the game.

Excellent example because from another vantage point or another person's perception the action could well have been taken to be one player simply punching another in a crowd. Now we not only have an opinion to penalize with a flagrant personal foul, if this other observer is a coach, evaluator, or an official, but the possibility of retaliation and escalation to a fight if our other viewer is player in the game who has just seen his/her teammate get punched.

Right, and there's no way in he11 I was going with a no-call. Frankly, I wondered later if I should have gone with an intentional personal. What I did worked well enough for that game, but....

The point is exactly what you stated but with a different conclusion.

When there is absolutely, unequivocally no danger involved, it shouldn't be called...

...A1 (@ the BC baseline) throwing the ball in to A2 (at the BC FT line) and all other players in the FC. A2 gently bumps the ball back towards A1 with the knuckles (as in the knuckle/fist bump handshake) where A1 takes 3-4 steps inbounds to get the ball.

There is no way this should ever be called. It has nothing whatsoever to do with the rule and why the rule exists. There is zero danger to anyone and it is simply irrelevant. To blow the whistle is merely being overly officious.

I agree ... this is a rule that might need to be looked at by the NFHS and how we should call it. I have called striking the ball with the fist twice in 20 years of calling games.

So if A2 gently kicks the ball back to A1 that would be fine with you as well?

Sorry Camron, but by failing to enforce the rules because you don't deem that it is necessary in a given situation, you run the risk of having the game degenerate into a farce. That is exactly what happened in the other thread started by Y2Koach about the official refusing to call a palming violation.

http://forum.officiating.com/showthread.php?t=46397

Don't be silly. A kick is not a safety rule.

Now tell me...

1. How many multiple fouls have you called?
2. How many times have you called both fouls when a shooter is hit across the arms then crashes into a defender?
3. Do you call 3 seconds for a player with 1 foot inside the lane at the FT line for 3.1 seconds?

Those are rules too and there are case plays from the NFHS detailing the calls. Unless you can tell me that you do so every time, you have absolutely no credibility in your arguments. You're doing the very thing you're saying I can't do.

Respectfully wondering how you would handle a sitch with a handicapped player( which I've seen on the high school level) who had a deformed hand permanently in a fist. By your definition it would also be a violation?

For those who argue not to make such a call, I would direct you to the very similar situation in which the thrower violates while making a throw-in from the backcourt endline. For years there were numerous officials who advocated ignoring such violations, but the NCAA came out a couple of seasons ago with a clear statement that these violations must be called regardless of whether or not there is defensive pressure.

The bottom line is that as an official it is your job to make the teams play within the constructs of the rules. Doing otherwise is unacceptable.