new to the shot clock

[rpirtle]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

5. Change of possession (including a made basket).

I know, there's that smart-@$$ side of me again. Or is that the nit-picking side? I can't tell.

Chuck

What about injured player (or lost contact)?

[ripian]

Originally posted by rpirtle

What about injured player (or lost contact)? [/B]

If the injured player is on the defence, then yes this is a reset. If the injured player is on the offence there is no reset. At least that is my understanding of the NCAA men's rule and the FIBA rule. It maybe different in FED.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by ripian

If the injured player is on the defence, then yes this is a reset. If the injured player is on the offence there is no reset. At least that is my understanding of the NCAA men's rule and the FIBA rule. It maybe different in FED. [/B]

First, there is no shot clock rule in Fed. If a state association wishes to use a shot clock for HS contests, I believe that each association can choose what the rules governing the shot clock will be. In MA, we use the NCAA's shot clock rules (except that it's 30 seconds, not 35).

Second, Ian's reply above is not correct -- at least as far as NCAA rules go. I honestly have no idea about the FIBA rules.

Here are the NCAA rules regarding the shot clock. I've omitted all the notes and A.R.'s. The point under discussion falls under Art 7, section b.

2-13 "Duties of the Shot-Clock Operator
The shot-clock operator shall:
Art. 6. Stop the timing device and reset it:
a. When team control is re-established after the team loses possession of the ball;
b. When a foul occurs (Exceptions: Rules 2-13.7.e, .f and .g);
c. When a held ball occurs (Exceptions: Rule 2-13.7.g);
d. When a try for goal strikes the ring or flange; or
e. When a violation occurs.

Art 7. Stop the timing device and continue time without a reset when play begins under the following circumstances:
a. The ball is deflected out of bounds by a defensive player;
b. A player is injured or loses a contact lens;
c. A charged timeout has concluded;
d. During team control as defined in Rule 4-13, a defensive player causes a held ball and the alternating-possession arrow favors the offensive team.
e. After a double personal foul when there is team control as defined in Rule 4-13 and as described in Rule 7-4.1.h.
f. After a double personal foul when a team is in possession of the ball for a throw-in as described in Rule 7-4.1.h
g. After any technical foul is assessed to the team in control of the ball or to the team in possession of the ball during a throw-in or to bench personnel or followers of that team, when these conditions exist. Exceptions: A single intentional technical foul or a single flagrant technical foul.
h. After a simultaneous held ball as described in Rule 7-4.1.g occurs during a throw-in and the alternating-possession arrow favors the throw-in team."

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by rpirtle
1. Intentional kick

Just to be the bigger smart *** (or would that be the smarter big ***?), the phrase "intentional kick" is redundant.

[rpirtle]

That's not true. The ball could be accidentally kicked. Player A1 is chasing the ball while it is rolling on the ground. He (or she) could "accidentally" kick the ball as they are reaching for it...no violation. (See below)

[NF Rule 9-3-4 A player shall not travel with the ball, intentionally kick it, strike it with the fist or cause it to enter and pass through the basket from below.
NOTE: Kicking the ball is a violation only when it is an intentional act; accidentally striking the ball with the foot or leg is not a violation.]

I guess you could rationalize that when the ball deflects off the foot accidentally it can't be a kick. But then you would be a HUGE "picker of nits" (not to mention that you'd be wrong). I'll leave the determination of whether that also makes you a "smart ***" up to you.

[Edited by rpirtle on Jul 6th, 2002 at 09:43 AM]

[Mark Dexter]

In order to have a kick violation, intent must be present.

Q.E.D.

[Mark Padgett]

I guess the bottom line is that the phrase "intentional kick" is not redundant, but the phrase "intentional kick violation" is.

Why can't we just all get along?

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by rpirtle
I guess you could rationalize that when the ball deflects off the foot accidentally it can't be a kick. But then you would be a HUGE "picker of nits" (not to mention that you'd be wrong). I'll leave the determination of whether that also makes you a "smart ***" up to you.

That would be correct. According to 4-28, the ball can't be "accidently kicked." Kicking is an intentional act. So, I don't know what you call it when the foot accidentally hits the foot, but it ain't kicking!