![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
I find it difficult to believe the NFHS really wants us to call a violation for the shooter entering the circle on this. Yeah, I know they could call a time out, but if the NFHS really wants to all but ensure a violation occurs on this, they should simply rule it an immediate violation, like in the new case this year on the thrower fumbling the ball away.
Is the intent really any different than the RPP for a throw-in? It seems to me the point is to put them on the clock and make them hustle over and play ball. Yes, I realize the case play goes out of its way to call out entering the semi circle. But don't you think if their intention was to put the shooting team in a position where they must either call a time out or violate, that they would have been very clear about that? I'd really like to see a case play on this exact situation.
__________________
"It is not enough to do your best; you must know what to do, and then do your best." - W. Edwards Deming |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
![]() More concretely, here are a two case plays which illustrate that a team is not to be penalized for some things that would otherwise be infractions (during the normal course of play): 9.2.9 SITUATION: Following a violation, the official has properly signaled and awarded a throw-in to Team A at a designated spot. No Team A player comes to the spot even though the official has allowed ample time for them to respond. The official then places the ball on the floor and begins the five-second count. (a) Both A1 and A2 step out of bounds and A1 picks up the ball; or (b) both A1 and A2 step out of bounds and A1 picks up the ball and hands it to A2. RULING: In (a), A2 must immediately return inbounds. In (b), it is a throw-in violation when A1 hands the ball to A2. (9-2-12) In part (a) of the above case, the RPP overrides 9-2-11 and A2 is allowed to immediately return inbounds. In the case below the NFHS directly states that the RPP takes precedence over 10-4-4. 10.4.4 SITUATION C: Following a charged time-out the ball is bounced to A1 for a throw-in even though Team B is still gathered at the sideline. The substitutes are off the bench and the coaches are huddled around the seated players. Should Team B be charged with a technical foul(s) for substitutes and coaches being off the bench or outside the optional coaching box? RULING: No. The resumptionof- play procedure takes precedence and no penalty is assessed for the other sideline infractions. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Resumption of play | jdmara | Basketball | 7 | Sat Nov 01, 2008 01:18am |
Resumption of Play???? | joseph2493 | Basketball | 27 | Fri Feb 15, 2008 10:27am |
resumption of play | palmettoref | Basketball | 28 | Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:26am |
Resumption of play following a time out during free throws | truerookie | Basketball | 23 | Sat May 14, 2005 01:40pm |
Resumption of play?? | ref4e | Basketball | 7 | Tue Jan 22, 2002 11:14pm |