The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 04:42pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Only the second time ever for this one

This weekend has got to be one of the strangest ones I've worked in a long time. Had another weird thing in one of my games this morning. It was an 8th grade boys game and I had to eject a kid after he picked up two technicals. What's so strange about that you say? Both fouls were for reaching over the line on defense and hitting the ball while it was still in the inbounders hands. He did it once in Q2 and once in Q4. To make it even weirder, those were the only two fouls he had in the whole game.

His team got another T when a different kid just reached over without hitting the ball in Q3, but the T in Q2 also counted as their first delay warning.

There was no complaint from the coach and, to his credit, he apparently understood the rule based on his comments to his players when these incidents happened. That was quite refreshing for a change.

Or maybe the reason he didn't complain was that his team won by 25.

I thought about whether or not I ever had this happen to a kid before and I think I remember it happening about 11 or 12 years ago, but that's the only time. What about you guys? Ever have the same kid do this twice in a game?
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 04:47pm
Fav theme: Roundball Rock
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Near Dog River (sorta)
Posts: 8,558
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
This weekend has got to be one of the strangest ones I've worked in a long time. Had another weird thing in one of my games this morning. It was an 8th grade boys game and I had to eject a kid after he picked up two technicals. What's so strange about that you say? Both fouls were for reaching over the line on defense and hitting the ball while it was still in the inbounders hands. He did it once in Q2 and once in Q4. To make it even weirder, those were the only two fouls he had in the whole game.

His team got another T when a different kid just reached over without hitting the ball in Q3, but the T in Q2 also counted as their first delay warning.

There was no complaint from the coach and, to his credit, he apparently understood the rule based on his comments to his players when these incidents happened. That was quite refreshing for a change.

Or maybe the reason he didn't complain was that his team won by 25.

I thought about whether or not I ever had this happen to a kid before and I think I remember it happening about 11 or 12 years ago, but that's the only time. What about you guys? Ever have the same kid do this twice in a game?
Never had it once, let alone twice, or twice within the same game, or twice within the same game by the same player.
__________________
Pope Francis
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 04:52pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
One For The Books, Or Your Book ...

Mark Padgett: I don't think that I've called this, or even observed this, twice in my twenty-eight year career. I think that I may have called this once, and maybe the similar, but different, reach across the line and hit the player intentional foul, once. You had this twice in one game, on the same player!

Please allow me to interject to bust a myth:
The defender may not break the imaginary plane during a throwin until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass. If the defender breaks the imaginary plane during a throwin before the ball has been released on a throw-in pass, the defender’s team will receive a team warning, or if the team has already been warned for one of the four delay situations, this action would result in a team technical foul. If the defender contacts the ball after breaking the imaginary plane, it is a player technical foul and a team warning will be recorded. If the defender fouls the inbounding player after breaking the imaginary plane, it is an intentional personal foul, and a team warning will be recorded.

I can't believe that I used the word interject. I swear that I've never, ever, used that word before. I had to look up the definition to make sure it was the right word for what I meant to say. Now I'm positive that the ghost of mbyron visited me in a dream of some type last night. No more gruel before I go to bed.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Sun Jan 11, 2009 at 05:01pm.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 04:56pm
Rich's Avatar
Get away from me, Steve.
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 15,771
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
This weekend has got to be one of the strangest ones I've worked in a long time. Had another weird thing in one of my games this morning. It was an 8th grade boys game and I had to eject a kid after he picked up two technicals. What's so strange about that you say? Both fouls were for reaching over the line on defense and hitting the ball while it was still in the inbounders hands. He did it once in Q2 and once in Q4. To make it even weirder, those were the only two fouls he had in the whole game.
It's my only technical this season -- in a boys varsity game. I whistled it and put a hand up and took two steps towards the table before I signaled the T and the visiting coach was already in the C's ear wanting the T. At least he knew the rule.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 05:47pm
#thereferee99
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 624
I suppose...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
This weekend has got to be one of the strangest ones I've worked in a long time. Had another weird thing in one of my games this morning. It was an 8th grade boys game and I had to eject a kid after he picked up two technicals. What's so strange about that you say? Both fouls were for reaching over the line on defense and hitting the ball while it was still in the inbounders hands. He did it once in Q2 and once in Q4. To make it even weirder, those were the only two fouls he had in the whole game.
... you could have spared him the DQ by calling the Team Technical for having hands through the plane (after DOG warning) prior to the contact with the ball. That is, if you were trying to be a sweetie about it.
__________________
-- #thereferee99
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 05:51pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by referee99 View Post
... you could have spared him the DQ by calling the Team Technical for having hands through the plane (after DOG warning) prior to the contact with the ball. That is, if you were trying to be a sweetie about it.
This would be a stretch, though.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 05:53pm
#thereferee99
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 624
Which?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
This would be a stretch, though.
Calling the Team Technical or Padgett being a sweetie?
__________________
-- #thereferee99
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 08:04pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,016
Quote:
Originally Posted by referee99 View Post
... you could have spared him the DQ by calling the Team Technical for having hands through the plane (after DOG warning) prior to the contact with the ball. That is, if you were trying to be a sweetie about it.

No, you couldn't. There's either a case or a recent interp that the "hitting the ball" gets punished, even if it is technically preceeeded by the "reaching through the plane."
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 09:38pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
As Usual, I Do Listen To bob, But Would Still Prefer A Citation ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
No, you couldn't. There's either a case or a recent interp that the "hitting the ball" gets punished, even if it is technically preceded by the "reaching through the plane."
I'm calling it the way bob jenkins suggests, but I don't recall either an interpretation, or case play, from the NFHS. I would love to see such a citation. I do recall some discussion regarding this situation here on the Forum a year, or two, ago. Maybe that's where bob jenkins heard something? I'm sure Nevadaref will be along in a little while to find some obscure, probably very old, interpretation to clear this up. Or perhaps Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. can climb up into his cold attic to find some rule written in fountain pen (remember those) that he got from his buddy, Jimmy, you know, the guy with the peach baskets.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 10:26pm
certified Hot Mom tester
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: only in my own mind, such as it is
Posts: 12,918
Post

Think of it this way. If you always ruled that as soon as the hands of the defender broke the plane you would call the violation, you would never have the call of his hands hitting the ball. If it's a single, continuous motion, you call the technical for hitting the ball. If the hands breaking the plane does not directly result in hitting the ball, you just call the delay violation.
__________________
Yom HaShoah
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 10:36pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
Mark Padgett: I Hate It When You Post Serious Stuff ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett View Post
Think of it this way. If you always ruled that as soon as the hands of the defender broke the plane you would call the violation, you would never have the call of his hands hitting the ball. If it's a single, continuous motion, you call the technical for hitting the ball. If the hands breaking the plane does not directly result in hitting the ball, you just call the delay violation.
That's the same way I view it, but I would still love to see some type of citation from the NFHS.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 10:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by referee99 View Post
... you could have spared him the DQ by calling the Team Technical for having hands through the plane (after DOG warning) prior to the contact with the ball. That is, if you were trying to be a sweetie about it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins View Post
No, you couldn't. There's either a case or a recent interp that the "hitting the ball" gets punished, even if it is technically preceeeded by the "reaching through the plane."
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
I'm calling it the way bob jenkins suggests, but I don't recall either an interpretation, or case play, from the NFHS. I would love to see such a citation. I do recall some discussion regarding this situation here on the Forum a year, or two, ago. Maybe that's where bob jenkins heard something? I'm sure Nevadaref will be along in a little while to find some obscure, probably very old, interpretation to clear this up. Or perhaps Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. can climb up into his cold attic to find some rule written in fountain pen (remember those) that he got from his buddy, Jimmy, you know, the guy with the peach baskets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
That's the same way I view it, but I would still love to see some type of citation from the NFHS.
This one is in the current book, Billy!

10.3.10 SITUATION D: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hands. Earlier in the game, Team B had received a team warning for delay. RULING: Even though Team B hadalready been issued a warning for team delay, when B1 breaks the plane and subsequently contacts the ball in the thrower’s hand, it is considered all the same act and the end result is penalized. A player technical foul is assessed to B1; two free throws and a division line throw-in for Team A will follow. The previous warning for team delay still applies with any subsequent team delay resulting in a team technical foul. (4-47; 9-2-10 Penalty 3; 10-1-5c)
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 10:45pm
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,379
Citation - Not Just A Nice Car to Drive

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
That's the same way I view it, but I would still love to see some type of citation from the NFHS.
9-2-PENALTIES 3. says, "If an opponent(s) of the thrower reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touches or dislodges the ball while in possession of the thrower ..., a technical foul shall be charged to the offender..."

This verbage seems to coordinate sequentially the "reach through" with the "touches or dislodges", considering the latter following the former to be, in essence, mutually inclusive; hence, one big, fat bad thing to do. Ergo, T.

You decide which is more clear, the NFHS citation or my explanation of it. I vote the citation.

P.S. Don't confuse the above-mentioned "reach through" with the forbidden "reach a......". Two different things.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 10:50pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,934
Thank You, And Thank You ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
This one is in the current book
Thanks. And I'll add in a thank you from Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. You saved him a trip up to his famous attic. It's 18 degrees Fahrenheit in Ohio right now. Not even an Eskimo, either Yupik, or Inuit, would want to go up there tonight.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Sun Jan 11, 2009, 10:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 14,995
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Thanks. And I'll add in a thank you from Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. You saved him a trip up to his famous attic. It's 18 degrees Fahrenheit in Ohio right now. Not even an Eskimo, either Yupik, or Inuit, would want to go up there tonight.
You're welcome.

BTW have you found your keys yet?
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Long Time Lurker, First Time Poster SoInZebra Basketball 122 Mon Mar 26, 2007 04:10pm
the time displayed as post time is way off chuck chopper General / Off-Topic 2 Wed Mar 29, 2006 02:09pm
time expired/time outs cloverdale Basketball 14 Tue Feb 15, 2005 01:06am
Another long time listener, first time caller Fifth And Goal Basketball 11 Wed Feb 25, 2004 10:30am
When is it time to call Time / Dead ball? Deion Softball 1 Tue Jul 01, 2003 11:50am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:20am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1