Backcourt Question

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

1) The Lack of Sufficient Action Rule was deleted from the rules years ago.

2) Don Fowler, a mentor of mine and a member of the OhioHSAA Officials Hall of Fame, had the following philosophy: "You have nothing until you have something." In this case we have nothing. The T or C as the case may be should officiate the game just as he/she would always officiate the game. I might say loud enough for the players near the ball that the ball is Live, but that is far as I would go.

MTD, Sr.

[Back In The Saddle]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

1) The Lack of Sufficient Action Rule was deleted from the rules years ago.

Yep. And good riddance to it. But 10-1-5 remains. The "policy" has changed, but the underlying principle remains.

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

2) Don Fowler, a mentor of mine and a member of the OhioHSAA Officials Hall of Fame, had the following philosophy: "You have nothing until you have something." In this case we have nothing. The T or C as the case may be should officiate the game just as he/she would always officiate the game. I might say loud enough for the players near the ball that the ball is Live, but that is far as I would go.

MTD, Sr.

How long would you be willing to continue officiating "nothing"?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

Yep. And good riddance to it. But 10-1-5 remains. The "policy" has changed, but the underlying principle remains.


How long would you be willing to continue officiating "nothing"?

NFHS R10-S1-A5 says:

Allow the game to develop into an actionless contest, this includes
the following and similar acts:
a. When the clock is not running consuming a full minute through not
being ready when it is time to start either half.
b. Delay the game by preventing the ball from being made promptly
live or from being put in play. See 7-5-1 and 8-1-2 for the
resumption-of-play procedure to use after a time-out or the
intermission between quarters. The procedure is used prior to
charging a technical foul in these specific situations.
c. Commit a violation of the throw-in boundary-line plane, as in
R9-S2-A10, after any team warning for delay.
d. Contact with the free thrower or a huddle of two or more players in
the lane by either team prior to a free throw following any team
warning for delay.
e. Interfering with the ball following a goal after any team warning for
delay.
f. Not having the court ready for play following any time-out after
any team warning for delay.


Therefore, I ask you, what part of R10-S1-A5 would you apply? I do not see any infraction of R10-S1-A5. Once again, there is nothing unitl something happens. Eventually a player is going to get the idea that the ball is live and do something; hopefully that something will be legal (and therefore nothing) and not something illegal (and therefore something).

MTD, Sr.

[Back In The Saddle]

If you do not see, it is only because you choose not to.

"Actionless contest" clearly describes the OP's situation. 10-20-30 seconds? Of both teams doing nothing except ignoring the live ball? Some of the infractions listed in 10-1-5 delay the game less than this.

The phrase "this includes the following and similar acts" – as you are well aware – indicates this is an open-ended list, not in any way restricted to the specific infractions on the list.

That "allowing the game to develop into an actionless contest" is included in the rules, along with traveling and fouls and all the other infractions, means it is most definitely something. The removal of the Lack of Sufficient Action rule did not rid the rules of any and all requirements for a team to play basketball.

You still haven't answered my question: "How long would you be willing to continue officiating 'nothing'?"

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

I
The phrase "this includes the following and similar acts," as you are well aware, indicates this is an open-ended list and not in any way restricted to the specific infractions on the list.

This is not as open ended as you might like. The "and similar acts" requires that the actions that you expand the list to include must be like one of those in the list. I can't see that this is anything like any of this listed items.

[Back In The Saddle]

No, certainly not entirely open-ended. But neither does "includes the following and similar acts" exclude other acts that "allow the game to develop into an actionless contest."

[jritchie]

I wonder if you started a count, just for the heck of it, would the offense pick it up, because they don't know why you are counting... I'm thinking I would give them a few seconds and then blow the whistle warn for delay both teams and start the throw in again.

[CoachP]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

This is not as open ended as you might like. The "and similar acts" requires that the actions that you expand the list to include must be like one of those in the list. I can't see that this is anything like any of this listed items.

My take on "similar acts" leads me to believe that there are 100's of ways to have an "actionless contest"...which would make the rule book a little thicker to try and include everything.

The point of rolling the ball w/o touching it is to keep the clock from starting. The ball is stopped, the play has served it's purpose, now it's up to A to play on or be warned (or T'd).....IMO.