Player Down - Rule and Your Philosophy

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by TGR

I agree with BktBallRef's process when a player goes down.

However, I believe that BillyMac's procedure that read, "Also, regarding "team control ends", that means as soon as the shot is attempted, the official blows the whistle, while the shot is in the air. If the attempt misses, we go to the arrow, if the attempt is successful, the other team gets the ball, and is allowed to run the endline" is incorrect.

Think about this situation: A1 goes down with a possible injury and Team B quickly transitions to a two on none break. B1 misses the lay up and B2 follows up and scores. I would never blow that play dead after B1's miss and go to the arrow. It wouldn't be fair.

You might not think that it's fair but it IS the rule.

NFHS rule 5-8-2NOTE: When a player is injured in Art. 2(a), the official may suspend play after the ball is dead or is in control of the injured player's team or when the opponents complete a play. A play is completed when a team loses control (including throwing for goal) or withholds the ball from play by ceasing to attempt to score or advance the ball to a scoring position. When necessary to protect an injured player, the official may immediately suspend play.

Billy's advice was to follow the existing rules, as cited above. Your advice is to make up your own rules. Methinks the wise thing to do is to go with Billy.

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You might not think that it's fair but it IS the rule.

NFHS rule 5-8-2NOTE: When a player is injured in Art. 2(a), the official may suspend play after the ball is dead or is in control of the injured player's team or when the opponents complete a play. A play is completed when a team loses control (including throwing for goal) or withholds the ball from play by ceasing to attempt to score or advance the ball to a scoring position. When necessary to protect an injured player, the official may immediately suspend play.

Billy's advice was to follow the existing rules, as cited above. Your advice is to make up your own rules. Methinks the wise thing to do is to go with Billy.

I agree with TGR and will not kill the play if there's a 2 on none play. NO WAY!

[BktBallRef]

If it's 2 on none, he shouldn't miss the layup, should he?

[just another ref]

Along the lines of "fair solution, but not by the book" I have seen the opposing coach ask for a timeout in this situation which is granted by the official, but then reported as an official timeout. I suppose the timeout request could be considered to be the completion of the play, which makes it all good.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

I agree with TGR and will not kill the play if there's a 2 on none play. NO WAY!

How do you explain ignoring the rule afterward? Or isn't that a consideration?

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

How do you explain ignoring the rule afterward? Or isn't that a consideration?

JR: you've been officiating long enough to know that you don't have to explain everything....it's just common sense.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

JR: you've been officiating long enough to know that you don't have to explain everything....it's just common sense.

Yabut...I've also been answering complaints about officials long enough to know what I can get away with also. And lying is never a part of that explanation.

If your personal "common sense" happens to go directly against a plainly written rule, how then am I, say as your supervisor, going to be able to explain away your "common sense" when I get one of those irate post-game phone calls or e-mails? Do you really think that a league is going to accept an explanation that it was OK for an official to ignore that plainly written rule because he didn't think it was "fair"?

[Mwanr1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yabut...I've also been answering complaints about officials long enough to know what I can get away with also. And lying is never a part of that explanation.

If your personal "common sense" happens to go directly against a plainly written rule, how then am I, say as your supervisor, going to be able to explain away your "common sense" when I get one of those irate post-game phone calls or e-mails? Do you really think that a league is going to accept an explanation that it was OK for an official to ignore that plainly written rule because he didn't think it was "fair"?

If the official cannot exercise good judgment, then YOU, as the SUPERVISOR, should not permit that official to officiate a basketball game -PERIOD! Rules are black and white, but officiating isn't. I don't think anyone of us here can truly say they have followed every single rules in the rulebook. Just think of the last time you exercise your personal "common sense" to pass up on a 3-sec violation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mwanr1

If the official cannot exercise good judgment, then YOU, as the SUPERVISOR, should not permit that official to officiate a basketball game -PERIOD! Rules are black and white, but officiating isn't. I don't think anyone of us here can truly say they have followed every single rules in the rulebook. Just think of the last time you exercise your personal "common sense" to pass up on a 3-sec violation.

Some officiating IS black and white. From this thread, it is very obvious that there are officials that don't understand that. You are completely right though in saying that I sureashell would hesitate to use that type of official in any meaningful game.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

You might not think that it's fair but it IS the rule.

NFHS rule 5-8-2NOTE: When a player is injured in Art. 2(a), the official may suspend play after the ball is dead or is in control of the injured player's team or when the opponents complete a play. A play is completed when a team loses control (including throwing for goal) or withholds the ball from play by ceasing to attempt to score or advance the ball to a scoring position. When necessary to protect an injured player, the official may immediately suspend play.

Billy's advice was to follow the existing rules, as cited above. Your advice is to make up your own rules. Methinks the wise thing to do is to go with Billy.

I do not like the Red part. I think it is stoopid.
I think the rule could stand without that tripe.

If the ball is in flight [with 5-on-4] and with the injured player out of harm's way, I would like to see play continue until it changes direction or until the ball backs away from the basket.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by mick

I do not like the Red part. I think it is stoopid.
I think the rule could stand without that tripe.

If the ball is in flight [with 5-on-4] and with the injured player out of harm's way, I would like to see play continue until it changes direction or until the ball backs away from the basket.

I do not like letting coaches call timeouts either. I think that rule is stoopid.

Unfortunately, what rules I personally like or dislike means diddly-squat when I put a whistle in my mouth.

That was my point, Mick.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I do not like letting coaches call timeouts either. I think that rule is stoopid.

Unfortunately, what rules I personally like or dislike means diddly-squat when I put a whistle in my mouth.

That was my point, Mick.

You don't have to defend someone else's rules to me, JR.

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I do not like letting coaches request timeouts

Fixed it for ya'.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Fixed it for ya'.

Senor Quixote strikes again.

[TGR]

With the citation of the NFHS rule by Jurrasic, I will have to agree with BiilyMac (even though it seems unfair).

Just for everyone's information, the NCAA Men's rule does read differently:
Rule 5 Section 10 Art. 7: Suspends play after the ball is dead or controlled by the injured player's team or when the opponents complete a play after a player is injured.
a. A play shall be completed when a team withholds the ball from play by ceasing to attempt to score or advance the ball to a scoring position.

Based on this citation, as long as the team continues to try to score, play is not suspended for injury. (Seems much more fair).