spirit of the rule

[Camron Rust]

I'm going to disagree...

If that's all there is to it, I'm not making that call....not with the ball 70' away being casually walked up the floor. That is not the kind of play this rule was made for.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm going to disagree...

If that's all there is to it, I'm not making that call....not with the ball 70' away being casually walked up the floor. That is not the kind of play this rule was made for.

I don't know if I'm picking the dirty end of this stick if they are not gaining an advantage. If the ball is in the frontcourt at the top of the key, you bet I'm calling it. But if the ball is in backcourt and the player is not gaining an advantage, I would have to see the play first. For instance, was the defender screened as well? If the defender is still on the offender's hip, I might let it go and warn him not to go out of bounds like he just did. Did he go a few steps out? Did he go 12 feet out of bounds, out the gym door, and back in on the other side? There are too many what-if's to make a judgment IMO

-Josh

[Adam]

I can see the use of judgment here, and I agree if you make this call, you'd better not have ignored it earlier in the game. That said, just because the ball is that far away doesn't mean the offense can't gain an advantage. Could be a press breaker designed to get A2 free for a pass.

[jdmara]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I can see the use of judgment here, and I agree if you make this call, you'd better not have ignored it earlier in the game. That said, just because the ball is that far away doesn't mean the offense can't gain an advantage. Could be a press breaker designed to get A2 free for a pass.

Agreed absolutely!

-Josh

[Back In The Saddle]

With less than a minute to play, I don't want to make any call that isn't either consistent with what we have already called or so obvious and/or advantageous as to be a no-brainer call in the first minute of the game.

[truerookie]

At times when, I come to this site rules are discussed adamantly to blood almost being spilled on computer screens. Other times, I find it unbelieveable. This is one of those times. Yes, there are alot of unknown factors and the spirit of the rule come into play. I truly do not believe this is one of those situations. The way I understand the spirit of the rule is those situations when the rule is a tweener where the Referee has to make a decision.

In the OP, how do we as an official do not know that the play is not a design play because the coach is counting on us to take the SPIRIT OF THE RULE approach and gain an advantage from calling the play.

Why take the chance?

I will make the call whether the play is 3' or 104' away.

This is why the Feds should take the NCAA approach and eliminate supposed perceived game interrupter(s) interpret by some.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by truerookie

At times when, I come to this site rules are discussed adamantly to blood almost being spilled on computer screens. Other times, I find it unbelievable. This is one of those times. Yes, there are alot of unknown factors and the spirit of the rule come into play. I truly do not believe this is one of those situations. The way I understand the spirit of the rule is those situations when the rule is a tweener where the Referee has to make a decision.

I used to call the game the way you and others suggest. Doing so will get you only so far. Calling things like this, nearly a full court from the play and such that you are the only one who has any idea it happened, will only cause others (partners, evaluators, assignors, coaches, etc.) to wonder if you even understand the game.

Some people want the game to be black-and-white and have difficulty seeing grey. But it is not and it never will be. Every rule has a reason and we must understand the reason for the rule before we can intelligently apply it....not just blindly apply it. That is the art of refereeing.

Originally Posted by truerookie

In the OP, how do we as an official do not know that the play is not a design play because the coach is counting on us to take the SPIRIT OF THE RULE approach and gain an advantage from calling the play.

Why take the chance?

There is no chance you're taking by not calling it or delaying the call. It should, fairly quickly, be evident whether it is by design and relevant.

Originally Posted by truerookie

I will make the call whether the play is 3' or 104' away.

This is simply an out-of-the-blue call. No one is expecting it. No on will be looking anywhere near it; you'll be the only one who saw it. Nobody (observers, coaches, fans, players, etc.) will even know what happened until you explain it. It's not unsportsmanlike or flragrant....so leave it alone. Make many of those non-obvious calls and you'll limit your career.

Originally Posted by truerookie

This is why the Feds should take the NCAA approach and eliminate supposed perceived game interrupter(s) interpret by some.

Do you really think the NCAA promotes calling stuff like this? In watching games on TV, how many off-screen whistles do you normally observe? Near zero. When you do get one, it is usually a rough, physical foul.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I can see the use of judgment here, and I agree if you make this call, you'd better not have ignored it earlier in the game. That said, just because the ball is that far away doesn't mean the offense can't gain an advantage. Could be a press breaker designed to get A2 free for a pass.

Should be easy enough to tell if that is the case...no need to hurry with the whistle until the pass is in flight (or even until it merely appears that A1 is trying to make the pass). If A1 continues pounding nails in the backcourt, save the whistle.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Should be easy enough to tell if that is the case...no need to hurry with the whistle until the pass is in flight (or even until it merely appears that A1 is trying to make the pass). If A1 continues pounding nails in the backcourt, save the whistle.

Except that the NFHS instruction has been to whistle the violation when the player leaves the floor.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Except that the NFHS instruction has been to whistle the violation when the player leaves the floor.

As usual, look at the case plays provided for insight into what they're thinking...understand the intent and purpose of the rule as is stated in the preface to the rulebook. The point of this rule is to keep a player/team from using the OOB area for thier advantage....extending the playing court beyond the lines.

If what the player is doing doesn't have that effect and is not an attempt to have that effect, it is not relevant. The point about "when" the violation occurs is relevant with regards to ordering relative to other possible actions. If it takes you a couple seconds to realize the violation, fine, the rule merely establishes when it occurred. This is not unlike a dribbler who has ended the dribble subsequently pushing a ball to the floor in what may be a pass or another dribble....we wait to see who touches it next to decide what the action was....but the violation, if their is one, occurred on the release.

If there is a possible play to the player and the player is making the run to get open and runs OOB around a screen that put the defender out of the play, call it.

If there is no "play" and they're running to the other side of the court because they decided they'd like to be on the other side our is just running around or they gain nothing by going OOB (a clear and better path was avalailable just inbounds), let it go....especially if it is in the last minute of what sound like was a good game.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

As usual, look at the case plays provided for insight into what they're thinking...

You mean like this one?


9.3.3 SITUATION B:

A1 and A2 set a double screen near the end line. A3 intentionally

goes out of bounds outside the end line to have his/her defender detained
by the double screen. RULING: The official shall call a violation on A3 as soon as
he/she steps out of bounds. The ball is awarded to Team B at a designated spot
nearest to where the violation occurred.

Yep, that's what I said to do.

Notice that this case play never mentions where the ball is during this action by the screeners, A1 and A2, and the runner, A3. I guess it doesn't matter.

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If that's all there is to it, I'm not making that call....not with the ball 70' away being casually walked up the floor. That is not the kind of play this rule was made for.

Except that is not what happened.

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

With the ball still in the backcourt under pressure near the FT line/top of the key opposite

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by LDUB

Except that is not what happened.

That's exactly what was described.

The play:
After the basket by team B - team A under back court pressure inbounds the ball, there is man to man pressure in the back court, with the ball being advanced casually by A1 under pressure between the FT line and top of the key.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

That's exactly what was described.

The play:
After the basket by team B - team A under back court pressure inbounds the ball, there is man to man pressure in the back court, with the ball being advanced casually by A1 under pressure between the FT line and top of the key.

I'm with you and not calling it based on what's been described by OP. The intent is clearly advantage/disadvantage and if that didn't happen, I've got nothing.

[Back In The Saddle]

From the "preamble" to NFHS Rule 1:

"Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule."

To those arguing for a whistle here, how would you answer the following questions?

1. Can you clearly explain the advantage our little lost lamb gained?
2. Can you clearly explain the disadvantage the other team was placed at?
3. Would other reasonable, knowledgeable, and objective people consider this an intelligent application of the rules?

This call will have a very significant and direct impact on the outcome of the game. So...take your time answering. Everybody in the gym awaits your clear, rational, and compelling explanation about why this was a good call.