Called player running OOB the other night
 

First game of the year. Thirty seconds left. Tie ballgame. A1 dribbling the ball out high, running some clock.

I'm L, about midway between lane line and 3-point line (I'm on my right side of the lane), 3-4 feet deep of the endline.

A2 runs right in front of my face, coming from the corner to my right all the way across the lane toward the other corner, running 3 feet off the court the entire way.

A didn't appear to be running a set play. A2 wasn't avoiding a screen. But I blew it, informed A2 of the violation and awarded B the ball.

In an old post on this play, I was on the side of don't call this violation if it's not part of a set play, avoiding a screen, gaining an advantage, etc. In this situation, he was so far off the court for so long, my rationale was that it would be easy for the defense to lose track of him.

Thoughts on this call? I'm pretty sure I'd call it again in the same situation, but I'm also pretty solid that I wouldn't have called it if it hadn't been so blatant/deep/of such length.

You were right there. Seems like a good call. Sounds exactly like why the rule was drawn up.

Curious - Was there a defender following him? Did it have any influence on the outcome of the game? Any bellyaching from the coach?

No - defense was playing a 2-3 zone.

Did it influence outcome? No idea. A fouled B on the subsequent throw-in, B1 missed the front end of the 1-1. Went to OT and A won.

Are you kidding? Of course there was bellyaching from the coach! :D

Very tough decision, IMHO. Last minute of a tie game. Haven't had to call it all night until now. Not going around a screen or getting an advantage, just sort of lost his bearings.

But obvious.

I think I would probably let it go unless he popped open on the other side and got the pass. I know that's more like the college rule, but it seems to fit this particular situation better. I would hate to call something that had literally no effect on the game at that point of that game.

Having said that, I will not fault you for calling an obvious violation. You were there, I wasn't. The purpose of the rule is to keep players inbounds and your player didn't step out for two steps and then come back in. He was OBVIOUSLY in violation.

If the defense is in zone, the offense could have definitely gained in advantage by running this far out of bounds. It could be difficult for the defense to see the offender crossing the court.

Good call!

-Josh

You described all the reasons I'm having any second thoughts at all, Scrapper. The main thing I saw in looking back was that he was so far OOB, it would have been easy for the defense to lose track of him, and it was a blatant violation.

But, I'm certainly open to having this discussion and having my mind changed. Needless to say, it was controversial in the gym! :D

I just cannot imagine officiating in a gym that was not nice and courteous when a call goes against their team ;)

-Josh

Two thoughts:

1) Call the obvious
2) Call what matters

Sometimes a violation is both obvious and matters. But not always.

None of these should have any influence over the calling of a foul or violation.

Only if you're 100% sure it didn't happen earlier in the game.

What if it happened twice earlier, but in front of your partner, and they decided to pass on it because there was no affect on the play, and you decided to call it now?

I understand your point, but I think you're parsing words more than anything else.

No, he's explaining what Scrappy meant. We have to do that sometimes.

If anyone is parsing words on this, it's you.

And I understand your point as well. I agree if it's a violation in the first minute, it should be a violation in the last minute. But we also need to be consistent as a crew, and that was my only point - I hope jdw3018 and their partner were consistent on that call. If it had not happened at any point earlier, I don't have a big problem with making that call, especially if the player was far enough OOB that's it's obvious on tape. But I would have a problem if the team had run that particular play a couple of times previous, and the partner passed on it while jdw3018 calls it at that particular time in the game.

Really good point. I hadn't seen it earlier, and in talking with my partners afterwards neither had seen it and both agreed with the call (for whatever it's worth).

So...consistency wasn't an issue.

Oh, and no doubt the player was far enough out it was obvious on tape - except that he may have been so far out that it would have been out of the frame of the video! ;)

Nobody can parse words: parsing is done to sentences (which are made of words, naturally).

I apologize for pettifogging. :D