Clapping/Yelling

[ajs8207]

During A1s shot, B1 yells or claps to try to distract A1. What do you have? Nothing? Technical? This has happened in a few games recently I have done. I have done nothing, but I thought it was wrong. What would you all do if this happened?

[JRutledge]

If you mean a regular shot, I have nothing.

Peace

[icallfouls]

Good point Rut. In case the reference is to shooting FT's:

First one is a warning as I have to determine the intent.

Usually a simple "the next one is a violation" sends the message.

If I think the player really doesn't know the rule, then I'll go to the player and let them know that if I think that they are doing it to distract/disconcert the shooter, then they will be called for a violation if the shooter misses. I'll also let the player know that when the coach wants to know what happened, that the player and I talked about it, they did it a second time, that is the reason the shooter got another try at it.

[mick]

Originally Posted by ajs8207

During A1s shot, B1 yells or claps to try to distract A1. What do you have? Nothing? Technical? This has happened in a few games recently I have done. I have done nothing, but I thought it was wrong. What would you all do if this happened?

ajs8207,
Nothing illegal. Put it out of your mind.
If you let it get to you, you may start rolling your eyes or shaking your head, and someone may pick up on that.

[Freddy]

Icallfouls - -
What's the rule basis for your determinations? I'm anxious to learn what I've been missing on this situation.

Nevermind . . . I see you just edited your post.

[icallfouls]

Freddy,
First of all, there really is no hard and fast definition for disconcertion, it is up to the officials to make that determination. So if you are looking for some sort of written/verbal definition there isn't one.

More than llikely the intent was to distract the shooter, but the original post did not include some things that I would use to help make that determination. As an example, if B is looking at the shooter and clapping and hollering in the direction of the shooter that is extremely obvious. If the player is bent over, its hard to say for certain that the action was directed at the shooter, so that is a time when I will make sure that player B and I have an understanding of what happens next if it is determined that the intent is to disconcert.

I think that we all know what disconcertion is when we see it, but if there is doubt, I have a way of dealing with it that works.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Freddy,
First of all, there really is no hard and fast definition for disconcertion, it is up to the officials to make that determination. So if you are looking for some sort of written/verbal definition there isn't one.

More than llikely the intent was to distract the shooter, but the original post did not include some things that I would use to help make that determination. As an example, if B is looking at the shooter and clapping and hollering in the direction of the shooter that is extremely obvious. If the player is bent over, its hard to say for certain that the action was directed at the shooter, so that is a time when I will make sure that player B and I have an understanding of what happens next if it is determined that the intent is to disconcert.

I think that we all know what disconcertion is when we see it, but if there is doubt, I have a way of dealing with it that works.

Hmmm, where in the rule does it say the opponent must deliberately disconcert the free thrower, or that he must intend to do so?

NFHS 9-1-3-c "No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower."
NCAA 9-1-2-f "No opponent shall disconcert (e.g., taunt, bait, gesture or delay) the free-thrower.

[Mark Padgett]

If you mean a "regular" shot, since there's no contact involved, the only type of foul this could possibly be is a technical. But really, you're going to call a technical for someone shouting at a shooter? Hey - this isn't golf.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Hmmm, where in the rule does it say the opponent must deliberately disconcert the free thrower, or that he must intend to do so?

NFHS 9-1-3-c "No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower."
NCAA 9-1-2-f "No opponent shall disconcert (e.g., taunt, bait, gesture or delay) the free-thrower.

I will agree with you in principle, but I would like the act to be deliberate if I am going to call this a violation. I do not see this too often where a disconcertion is not intentional.

Peace

[icallfouls]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Hmmm, where in the rule does it say the opponent must deliberately disconcert the free thrower, or that he must intend to do so?

NFHS 9-1-3-c "No opponent shall disconcert the free thrower."
NCAA 9-1-2-f "No opponent shall disconcert (e.g., taunt, bait, gesture or delay) the free-thrower.

Then you can be the guy that calls the violation every time someone moves their head or adjusts their shirt or tells their teammates to get after it while awaiting a FT because that is what you are implying. It is up to the official to determine what is disconcertion.

What is taunting, baiting or gesturing that you are going to use for your determination?

Without enough information, I gave an option and a way to handle it.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I will agree with you in principle, but I would like the act to be deliberate if I am going to call this a violation. I do not see this too often where a disconcertion is not intentional.

Peace

I, in turn, agree with your response in principle. However, in icallfouls' scenario, he's got a player clapping and shouting during a free throw and he is concerning himself with trying to determine whether or not it was directed at the thrower. That is the wrong question to ask, IMHO. The right question to ask is, "Did the clapping and shouting distract, or disconcert, the thrower?" If the answer to that question is yes, then award a replacement throw. There really is no need to judge intent.

However, I'm just cynical enough to believe that any distracting and unusual behavior by an opponent during a free throw, especially an opponent along the lane, IS an attempt to disconcert the thrower. No matter what the lying little **** says in protest when I call it.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

Then you can be the guy that calls the violation every time someone moves their head or adjusts their shirt or tells their teammates to get after it while awaiting a FT because that is what you are implying. It is up to the official to determine what is disconcertion.

What is taunting, baiting or gesturing that you are going to use for your determination?

Without enough information, I gave an option and a way to handle it.

Where did I imply that any little movement or talking should be called a violation? My point was, is, and remains simply this: If an opponent DOES disconcert a free thrower, a violation has occurred, without regard or consideration of the opponent's intent.

It's still a judgment as to whether or not the shooter was disconcerted. I cannot imagine a scenario where "someone mov[ing] their head or adjust[ing] their shirt or tell[ing] their teammates to get after it while awaiting a FT" would disconcert a free thrower. However clapping and hollering during a free throw...

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

However, I'm just cynical enough to believe that any distracting and unusual behavior by an opponent during a free throw, especially an opponent along the lane, IS an attempt to disconcert the thrower. No matter what the lying little **** says in protest when I call it.

There is a difference between talking to a teammate not very loudly and clapping your hands only when the opponent is just about the release the ball. And if they are close or doing something that is borderline I would usually warn before I award another shot (if the shot misses of course). As said before, usually a “knock it off” stops a lot of that crap.

Peace

[icallfouls]

OK BITS, so the shooter makes the first one what are you suggesting?

Here's another, after the shooter makes the first one and his teammates step into the lane to slap hands are you calling the delay of game? You are taking judgment out of the game.

I believe that common sense in both cases is to apply judgement that fits the situation, which is what I am saying.

Do what you want for your games.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by icallfouls

OK BITS, so the shooter makes the first one what are you suggesting?

Here's another, after the shooter makes the first one and his teammates step into the lane to slap hands are you calling the delay of game? You are taking judgment out of the game.

I believe that common sense in both cases is to apply judgement that fits the situation, which is what I am saying.

Do what you want for your games.

Well, if the shooter makes the first one, obviously he was NOT disconcerted. Disconcerting necessarily implies an action by an opponent that produces a reaction in the shooter. In this case, there was an action that did not produce a negative reaction.

And yes, in this case, I would tell the kid to knock it off.

However, if the thrower misses the first shot because of, in my judgment, the clapping and hollering, I will not be trying to divine the opponent's intent. I will simply be awarding a replacement throw because the thrower WAS disconcerted (opponent's action caused a reaction from the thrower).

As for the kids delaying the game, no, I'm not very likely to call that. In fact, I had one game today where both teams seemed intent on huddling in the lane after every shot. We simply pestered them until they got back to playing. But if I do choose to call this, that call will be based on the fact that the game was actually delayed, and I will not give consideration to whether they intended to delay the game.

I'm not taking judgment out of the game, except judgments that don't belong there.