Shot Clock Backcourt Violation

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

But (two big "ifs" coming here. . .) IF you know that control was gained immediately and IF you know the shot clock started properly, then when the shot clock shows 24, a violation has occurred. Somebody needs to call it. If the Trail's count is off because he/she is concentrating on the backcourt pressure, the Lead should make the call.

I have no problem with the Lead making the call here.

I have a huge problem with the lead calling this. For one the count of the officials is the only thing that matters. No where under common rules but the NBA says the clock is not the judge of this call? The Lead making this call might only know what the clock says, but might not know other factors as to why there is not violation. The someone that needs to call this is only the trail. Would you promote the same thing without a shot clock?

Peace

[Man In Blue]

The shot clock is what makes this sit interesting.

You could say the same thing for a 3 second violation. The lead is watching the paint and is looking for advantage/ disadvantage. By rule the trail has the right to make a 3 second call.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Man In Blue

The shot clock is what makes this sit interesting.

You could say the same thing for a 3 second violation. The lead is watching the paint and is looking for advantage/ disadvantage. By rule the trail has the right to make a 3 second call.

Three seconds and 10 second back court are two different things. Would you have the lead call a 5 second count that the Trail has started a count near the division line?

Peace

[Man In Blue]

I might I am kind of a call hog!

There are so many interesting situations and how each of us would handel them.

[dbking]

shot clock should not start until there is team control. Big rule difference between NFHS and NCAA. Team control exists during a throw in in NCAA and does not in NFHS. We do not have shot clock in HS and I assume they use the team control part of the rule. The game clock and shot clock should start independent of each other.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by dbking

shot clock should not start until there is team control. Big rule difference between NFHS and NCAA. Team control exists during a throw in in NCAA and does not in NFHS. We do not have shot clock in HS and I assume they use the team control part of the rule. The game clock and shot clock should start independent of each other.

Reference please??

Peace

[dbking]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Reference please??

Peace

NCAA 4-61 Is the time to shoot during team control
NCAA 2-15-2c When a player has ball at disposal for a throw in ( Team Control def )
NCAA 5-9-4 The game and shot start when ball is legally touched on a throw in

nfhs 4-12-2 There is no team control during a throw in.

I do not have any rule book for a nfhs shot clock. The shot clock on any missed attempt does not start when the ball is deflected during a rebound. It only starts when the ball is in team control and is reset when control is changed or it hits the rim of team in control's basket.

[OHBBREF]

I have two problems with the lead making this call, first who is watching the other eight players on the court? I presume the trail has the on ball match-up -So if the lead is watching that match-up to and the clock the others could be running amuck.

Secondly at 24 there are many other things that could be going on that would allow for a difference of one maybe two seconds in the time that have been named here, now if the clock were at 15 or 20 seconds possibly I can see the lead making the call but I still have to go back to scenario A who is watching the rest of the game?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I have a huge problem with the lead calling this. For one the count of the officials is the only thing that matters.

Why would you say this? The rule says they're allowed 10 seconds. It doesn't say that they are allowed to be in the backcourt until the official counts to 10. If you have definite knowledge that they've had control in the backcourt for 10 seconds, SOMEBODY has to call it. If the Trail is distracted by the backcourt pressure, then who else can call it? (Hint: the Lead. )

And to answer your question about doing it without the shot clock, I would say that the shot clock simply makes it easier for the Lead to help. I would not expect the Lead to check the game clock after every made basket. It's a much harder sell to the coach without the shot clock, no doubt. I wouldn't expect help from the Lead without it. Although, if we were coming out of a time-out and the game clock showed 0:47, that would be pretty easy to explain.

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

I have two problems with the lead making this call, first who is watching the other eight players on the court?

We're talking most likely about a pressing situation. So the Trail has more than just a 1-on-1 matchup to worry about. So that leave fewer than 8 other players for the Lead to watch. Secondly, if the Lead also has too much to watch, then obviously, I'm not going to say that he/she should be clockwatching as well. But it's not that hard to look up from midcourt and see the shot clock. I would expect that -- even in a press -- the Lead would be able to sneak a peek at the shot clock to help out with the 10-seconds.

Secondly at 24 there are many other things that could be going on that would allow for a difference of one maybe two seconds in the time that have been named here,

You must have missed my "two big ifs". IF you know that control was established immediately, and IF you know that the shot clock was started properly, then there's no difference between the shot clock and the 10-second count. That's the situation I'm talking about.

now if the clock were at 15 or 20 seconds possibly I can see the lead making the call but I still have to go back to scenario A who is watching the rest of the game?

If it takes somebody 15 or 20 seconds to call a 10-second violation, then shame on them. That's completely unacceptable and I would BEG my partner to help me if that were me.