The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Clapping/Yelling (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/49533-clapping-yelling.html)

jdw3018 Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:03am

Quote:

Originally Posted by christianH (Post 549759)
I'd better trying and warn coaches about my interpretations of this SHOT thing before the match starts.

I'd suggest maybe checking with your assignor/supervisor and/or some other officials in the area, as well. If it's happening a lot it means they aren't being called on it in other games. Maybe that's because others are ignoring the rule, but it may also be because your association doesn't want it called the way you've interpreted.

Good luck!

christianH Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:18am

Will do it


Actually we have a meeting next Saturday and I will raise this question.


will keep you posted


thanks a lot

mick Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:32am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1 (Post 549749)
Officiating in Great Britain, I would guess that you're using FIBA rules. Under FIBA rules this year, it is a technical foul to employ "distracting tactics" without attempting to play defense. I would normally think of this call when a player is beat and simply yells or claps behind the offensive player. But I suppose it's possible to apply it even when the shouting is done in front of the player.

Then it seems that yelling "shot" while attempting to play defense, even if it is not good defense, is not a technical foul.

Scrapper1 Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:15am

Quote:

Originally Posted by mick (Post 549768)
Then it seems that yelling "shot" while attempting to play defense, even if it is not good defense, is not a technical foul.

Quite possibly. I don't know the exact wording of the rule. I was only going by what was posted in a previous thread.

Adam Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:06pm

I've done this forever while playing. When there are four other defenders, they need to know when to start boxing out. And yes, it's quite possible they weren't looking at the shooter if they're doing their jobs defensively.

This isn't a technical foul. Basketball ain't golf.

That's completely different, however, than yelling to distract the shooter from behind when you're beat on a break.

ajs8207 Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 549799)
I've done this forever while playing. When there are four other defenders, they need to know when to start boxing out. And yes, it's quite possible they weren't looking at the shooter if they're doing their jobs defensively.

This isn't a technical foul. Basketball ain't golf.

That's completely different, however, than yelling to distract the shooter from behind when you're beat on a break.

So would you call a technical foul on that?

Adam Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajs8207 (Post 549807)
So would you call a technical foul on that?

Not unless I thought it was loud enough to risk ear damage to the shooter; or unless I get told by my assigners to call it. But I ain't asking them.

Guess it's not "completely" different. :) Just a little bit different.

M&M Guy Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:34pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 549811)
Not unless I thought it was loud enough to risk ear damage to the shooter; or unless I get told by my assigners to call it. But I ain't asking them.

Guess it's not "completely" different. :) Just a little bit different.

Hey, good backtrack.

You would make a decent politician.

fiasco Tue Nov 11, 2008 12:42pm

What about disconcerting from the bench on a FT?

Would you call that a TF?

bob jenkins Tue Nov 11, 2008 01:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by fiasco (Post 549815)
What about disconcerting from the bench on a FT?

Would you call that a TF?


No, but I might call it a violation (I have quietly "warned" the bench not to do that).

Adam Tue Nov 11, 2008 01:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M Guy (Post 549813)
Hey, good backtrack.

You would make a decent politician.

That's just the sort of mean-spirited back-stabbing that made Dan go away.

You take that back.

M&M Guy Tue Nov 11, 2008 02:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 549819)
That's just the sort of mean-spirited back-stabbing that made Dan go away.

You take that back.

Well, ok.

You would make an indecent politican.

Better?

Adam Tue Nov 11, 2008 03:36pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M Guy (Post 549843)
Well, ok.

You would make an indecent politican.

Better?

Much.

Hey, wait a minute....

OHBBREF Tue Nov 11, 2008 03:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 545884)
It is obviously true that if the shot is good, disconcertion is irrelevant. BUT, by this logic, B1 does whatever on the first shot, which is good, which you say means no disconcertion. So now, on the second shot, B1 does exactly the same thing, but the shot misses, you would say that it is disconcertion? I say that if the violator is judged to have bad intentions, it makes this violation easier to call. But mainly I say the decision to make the call should already have been made before the result of the shot is known.

Yes that decision could be made, by the delayed violation signal, however because the ball went in does not mean the shooter was not the victim of diconcerstion, as you so accurately noted from you game in Beruit with bombs going off. But if the shot goes in you can not punnish the violation all you can do is tell little Johnny not to try to blow up the gym again while the other team is shooting free throws. Or you will call in an air strike to stop them. :p

BillyMac Tue Nov 11, 2008 06:42pm

Disconcerting From The Bench ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by fiasco (Post 549815)
What about disconcerting from the bench on a FT?

NFHS 9-1-3-c: No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower.
Penalty: If the violation is by the free-thrower's opponent only:
a.) If the try is successful, the goal counts and the violation is disregarded.
b.) If the try is not successful, the ball becomes dead when the free throw ends, and a substitute throw shall be attempted by the same free thrower under conditions the same as for the free throw for which it is substituted.
c.) If a violation by the free thrower follows disconcertion by an opponent, a substitute free throw shall be awarded.

I believe that opponents would include the opposing players, team members, and bench personnel, even the team chaplain on the end of the Catholic school team bench.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:16am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1