Made a new coach friend

[AKOFL]

Boys V up in Glennellen Alaska. The V team is much better and has not lost to the H team in 10 years. I may be giving away the end with that fact. Minute and a half in I call a foul on V kid. He looks at me and says no way, I disagree and reasure him he did foul. Then he procedes to call BS on my call. No prob, Now serving T for one. As we shoot the free-throws the V coach askes my partner "Isn't it a little early for that". Partner looks at him with a appropriately confused look. Next quarter H player has a steal and head down for a layup. The defenders catch up so he jump stops,head fake, and the two defenders fly by. The third defender slaps the backboard on the opposite side of the basket when the shot had not been released yet. Whack. T number 2. Coach and player think that this is a legitament try for a block. They contiue to self destruct and lose by 5. Come to find out from friend this coach doesn't like officials. I don't understand that. I'm sure he is looking forward to seeing me real soon

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

The third defender slaps the backboard on the opposite side of the basket when the shot had not been released yet. Whack.

Does continuous motion apply here? A technical can only be assessed if the backboard is slapped during a try. Since the ball wasn't released, was the try in progress? If not, a technical foul cannot be assessed. If the try was in progress, nice call.

A player who strikes a backboard, during a tap, or a try, so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul.

[Ignats75]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Does continuous motion apply here? A technical can only be assessed if the backboard is slapped during a try. Since the ball wasn't released, was the try in progress? If not, a technical foul cannot be assessed. If the try was in progress, nice call.

A player who strikes a backboard, during a tap, or a try, so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul.

10-3-4a says a T can be assessed for putting a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage. Intimidation could be construed as trying to gain an advantage.

[AKOFL]

The shot was in the prosses of being made when the defender slapped the backboard. Not on the rim or backboard yet. The kid was one of thoes cool guys too. I thought it was a easy call.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Does continuous motion apply here? A technical can only be assessed if the backboard is slapped during a try. Since the ball wasn't released, was the try in progress? If not, a technical foul cannot be assessed. If the try was in progress, nice call.

A player who strikes a backboard, during a tap, or a try, so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul.

Very poor wording of the rule, which needs to be changed.

Nice job pointing out the flaw.

[Bishopcolle]

Originally Posted by BillyMac
"Does continuous motion apply here? A technical can only be assessed if the backboard is slapped during a try. Since the ball wasn't released, was the try in progress? If not, a technical foul cannot be assessed. If the try was in progress, nice call.

A player who strikes a backboard, during a tap, or a try, so forcefully that it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Very poor wording of the rule, which needs to be changed. "

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Nice job pointing out the flaw.

Question here???? The case book 10.3.4 comment does NOT mention "during a try or shot." It says, "A player who strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-6." Article 6 refers to "committing an unsporting foul." I think you have to call the forceful striking of the backboard, if it is SOOOO hard and loud that everyone in the building is looking at you, regardless of a "shot or try." What say you?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Does continuous motion apply here? A technical can only be assessed if the backboard is slapped during a try. Since the ball wasn't released, was the try in progress? If not, a technical foul cannot be assessed. If the try was in progress, nice call.

Seems to me that with this year's POE, that is an easy technical foul. He can't possibly be trying to block the shot because there IS no shot. Whack away. If the coach questions it, "Coach, that's one of our points of emphasis this year. They want it called."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Bishopcolle

The case book 10.3.4 comment does NOT mention "during a try or shot." It says, "A player who strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration, may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-6. What say you?

The case play does mention a try or shot, "A1 tries for a goal", as does 10-3-4-B, and not only that, the rule also states that the ball must be in flight. It's not in flight in the original post, so a technical foul can't be assessed under 10-3-4-B:

NFHS 10-3-4 A player shall not: Illegally contact the backboard/ring by:
b. Intentionally slapping or striking the backboard or causing the ring to
vibrate while a try or tap is in flight or is touching the backboard or is in the
basket or in the cylinder above the basket.

10.3.4 SITUATION: A1 tries for a goal, and (a) B1 jumps and attempts to block the shot but instead slaps or strikes the backboard and the ball goes into the basket; or (b) B1 vibrates the ring as a result of pulling on the net and the ball does not enter the basket. RULING: In (a) legal and the basket counts; and (b) a technical foul is charged to B1 and there is no basket. COMMENT: The purpose of the rule is to penalize intentional contact with the backboard while a shot or try is involved or placing a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage. A player who strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-6.

NFHS 10-3-6 A player shall not: Commit an unsporting foul.

So if the act is deemed to be unsporting, good call.

[Bishopcolle]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The case play does mention a try or shot, "A1 tries for a goal", as does 10-3-4-B, and not only that, the rule also states that the ball must be in flight. It's not in flight in the original post, so a technical foul can't be assessed under 10-3-4-B:

NFHS 10-3-4 A player shall not: Illegally contact the backboard/ring by:
b. Intentionally slapping or striking the backboard or causing the ring to
vibrate while a try or tap is in flight or is touching the backboard or is in the
basket or in the cylinder above the basket.

10.3.4 SITUATION: A1 tries for a goal, and (a) B1 jumps and attempts to block the shot but instead slaps or strikes the backboard and the ball goes into the basket; or (b) B1 vibrates the ring as a result of pulling on the net and the ball does not enter the basket. RULING: In (a) legal and the basket counts; and (b) a technical foul is charged to B1 and there is no basket. COMMENT: The purpose of the rule is to penalize intentional contact with the backboard while a shot or try is involved or placing a hand on the backboard to gain an advantage. A player who strikes either backboard so forcefully it cannot be ignored because it is an attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration may be assessed a technical foul pursuant to Rule 10-3-6.

NFHS 10-3-6 A player shall not: Commit an unsporting foul.

So if the act is deemed to be unsporting, good call.

BillyMac: I agree with all of your comments, except your original comment that the technical can ONLY be assessed if the slap is during a try....Contradicting you, the #4 in the POEs this year mentions that the slap, if made during an attempt to block a shot, "should not be penalized." (page 69) Continuing, "The spirit and intent of that rule is to penalize a player for drawing attention to himself or as a means of venting frustration."

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Bishopcolle

I agree with all of your comments, except your original comment that the technical can ONLY be assessed if the slap is during a try....Contradicting you, the #4 in the POEs this year mentions that the slap, if made during an attempt to block a shot, "should not be penalized." Continuing, "The spirit and intent of that rule is to penalize a player for drawing attention to himself or as a means of venting frustration."

I think we agree. If the backboard is slapped, and it's not during a tap or try (or is touching the backboard or is in the basket or in the cylinder above the basket), then the official could only penalize the slapping with a technical foul under NFHS 10-3-6 (unsporting), not under NFHS 10-3-4 (slapping backboard).

[Bishopcolle]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I think we agree. If the backboard is slapped, and it's not during a tap or try (or is touching the backboard or is in the basket or in the cylinder above the basket), then the official could only penalize the slapping with a technical foul under NFHS 10-3-6 (unsporting), not under NFHS 10-3-4 (slapping backboard).

10-4...I agree....thanks for all of your input....

[shishstripes]

Originally Posted by AKOFL

The shot was in the prosses of being made when the defender slapped the backboard. Not on the rim or backboard yet. The kid was one of thoes cool guys too. I thought it was a easy call.

If the defender is slapping the opposite side of the backboard as the shooter and potential shot, they are not attempting to block a shot. Either way, before shot or after, how can you not call a technical?