Tough situation my partner put us in

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Smitty

What would you do?

Tell the newbie that camp is a good opportunity to work on game management techniques and send him/her over to the blue coach to explain.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Tell the newbie that camp is a good opportunity to work on game management techniques and send him/her over to the blue coach to explain.

You could also tell your P to be ready to tell the blue coach that camp is a good time to learn how to handle being on the short end of crappy rules.

[just another ref]

Let's turn to page 7 in our books.

THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES

A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule.




Give the ball to blue.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Let's turn to page 7 in our books.

THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES

A player or team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule.




Give the ball to blue.

NO!! NO!! NO!! There is specific rule that covers this situation and unfortunately White is awarded a designated spot throw-in.

MTD, Sr.

[M&M Guy]

Maybe that's my problem - I haven't used big red letters.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Maybe that's my problem. I haven't used big red letters.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. has never been known to fly under the radar. He always says what he means, and he always means what he says. You always know exactly where he stands on an issue. No if, ands, buts, ors, or nors, about it.

[wanja]

The outcome is correct by common sense and justifiable by rule. This was not an inadvertant whistle and should not be treated as such. Your partner erroneously called a backcourt violation and should live with the call. He should award the ball to blue and play on.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by wanja

The outcome is correct by common sense and justifiable by rule. This was not an inadvertant whistle and should not be treated as such. Your partner erroneously called a backcourt violation and should live with the call. He should award the ball to blue and play on.

You ever take away a violation call? I've done it due to confusing lines. I've had partners do it, one after he recognized it was a throwin so the action was legal; the other after I went to him as lead to tell him it had been tipped by the defense in the lane.

It absolutely is an inadvertent whistle, but Camron is right, I think, about the purpose and intent. The IW (or "accidental whistle" as I believe it's called) rule was written to have a fair way of putting the ball back in play. It was not meant to take away an obvious possession like this.

Just don't tell Chargers fans this, or they'll get all riled up again.

[truerookie]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

.

Just don't tell Chargers fans this, or they'll get all riled up again.

Snaqwells, we were cool (unbeknown to each other) until you brought the Chargers out of your mouth!!

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by wanja

The outcome is correct by common sense and justifiable by rule.

Common sense? So what? Are you really saying you would make a ruling based on not wanting the blue team to get upset with you (and the crew)?

Do you have a rule reference?

So, here we go with the "common sense" vs. "rule" argument. Color me old and grumpy, but I see one major flaw with the argument. It goes completely against 4-36. Yep, one team got screwed out of a score because the official made the mistake of blowing the whistle when they should not have. Too bad - there's a rule to fix that. Once they feel the heat, I'll bet they don't do that again.

So, you give the ball to blue because they might get upset? If I'm white's coach, I'm really going to get upset that you're compounding a screwup with completely ignoring a specific rule. You're going to be getting heat one way or the other, so why not get it right one of those times? And if the heat's too bad, there's a rule to fix that as well.

Look, I understand the issue of rec leagues, camp situation etc. And, if the whistle happend so close to blue getting the ball, I would have no problem with blue ending up with possession. But as I read the OP, the whistle sounded well before blue ended up with it, so white still has team control, and white will have the throw-in.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Common sense? So what? Are you really saying you would make a ruling based on not wanting the blue team to get upset with you (and the crew)?

Do you have a rule reference?

So, here we go with the "common sense" vs. "rule" argument. Color me old and grumpy, but I see one major flaw with the argument. It goes completely against 4-36. Yep, one team got screwed out of a score because the official made the mistake of blowing the whistle when they should not have. Too bad - there's a rule to fix that. Once they feel the heat, I'll bet they don't do that again.

So, you give the ball to blue because they might get upset? If I'm white's coach, I'm really going to get upset that you're compounding a screwup with completely ignoring a specific rule. You're going to be getting heat one way or the other, so why not get it right one of those times? And if the heat's too bad, there's a rule to fix that as well.

Look, I understand the issue of rec leagues, camp situation etc. And, if the whistle happend so close to blue getting the ball, I would have no problem with blue ending up with possession. But as I read the OP, the whistle sounded well before blue ended up with it, so white still has team control, and white will have the throw-in.

Have a look at the case plays regarding an official incorrectly announcing the number of FTs. The rulings in these plays are not based on the rules. In fact, some of them technically contradict rules. But, the rulings are common sense and do the right thing.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Have a look at the case plays regarding an official incorrectly announcing the number of FTs. The rulings in these plays are not based on the rules. In fact, some of them technically contradict rules. But, the rulings are common sense and do the right thing.

The cases you mention involve correctable errors - a specific section of the rules. I can also show you a case play where the official gives the ball to the wrong team for a throw-in, and once the ball is inbounds, it's too late to correct - 7.5.2(a). Wouldn't it make "common sense" to stop play and give it back to the correct team? But we cannot, because it's not a correctable error.

The difference here is this play is not a correctable error, the whistle caused play to stop, and any ruling you make would be based on an assumption. You are assuming blue would catch the ball cleanly and not fumble it OOB. Would you also make the ruling blue would've made the easy layup? Why not save some time and just count the basket and give it back to white for the endline throw-in? How far ahead would you go to assume? The rule involving POI is pretty specific, and apparently doesn't need any additional case plays to expand.

Again, I understand the "theory" of trying to insert common sense into strange situations, and I would not object to giving it to blue if the whistle happened so close to the change of possession it would be hard to tell which happened first. Unfortunately, this is covered specifically in the rules, and doing something else would be a specific deviation from the rules.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

The cases you mention involve correctable errors - a specific section of the rules.

Actually, the case I'm referring to is not a correctable error (see below).

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I can also show you a case play where the official gives the ball to the wrong team for a throw-in, and once the ball is inbounds, it's too late to correct - 7.5.2(a). Wouldn't it make "common sense" to stop play and give it back to the correct team? But we cannot, because it's not a correctable error.

We have a specific case on that error. There is a window where the error is correctable...up to the point where the throwin has been completed (there is actually rules support that this is correctable and I've posted about that previously). This gives the team a chance to bring it to the official's attention. If not cut off at that point in time, how late would be too late?

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

The difference here is this play is not a correctable error, the whistle caused play to stop, and any ruling you make would be based on an assumption. You are assuming blue would catch the ball cleanly and not fumble it OOB.
...
The rule involving POI is pretty specific, and apparently doesn't need any additional case plays to expand.

See the following case...the whistle causes the play to stop in a non correctable error situation with one team in control of the ball and the ruling doesn't go with the POI.

Case Play 8.6.1

A1 is about to attempt the first of a one-and-one free throw situation. The administering official steps in and erroneously informs players that two shots will be taken. A1's first attempt is unsuccessful. The missed shot is rebounded by: (a)B1, with all other players motionless in anticipation of another throw....The officials recognize their error at this point.

Ruling: In (a) the officials error clearly put one team at a disadvantage.... Play should be whistled dead immediately and resumed using the alternating-possession procedure.

The only relevant rule says to give it to the team that was in control when the ball becomes dead. However, the ruling does not give the ball to the team that was in control at the time the ball became dead but goes to the AP arrow. It makes the assumption that, even though it is most likely, Team B may not have obtained the rebound. It does what is right...making the assumption that either team may have retreived the rebound...and goes to the AP arrow.

In the realm of official's errors, 8.6.1 sets the precedent for resuming in contradiction to what the rules support when one team clearly has gained an advantage through the officials error when the normal rules are followed.

Given that, in the OP, there was no way for team A to legally retrieve the ball, the precedent set by the above case supports, at a minimum, going to the arrow if not awarding the ball to the blue team.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Look, I understand the issue of rec leagues, camp situation etc. And, if the whistle happend so close to blue getting the ball, I would have no problem with blue ending up with possession. But as I read the OP, the whistle sounded well before blue ended up with it, so white still has team control, and white will have the throw-in.

I completely understand your point of view as well. It was just such a weird situation because White could not have legally touched the ball at the time of the whistle, so that compounded my confusion. I still think by rule, white should get the ball, but I also would lean toward giving it to blue based on the situation.

I really wish my partner hadn't blown his whistle - then the girl on blue could have missed her layup and white would have had the ball anyway.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Common sense? So what? Are you really saying you would make a ruling based on not wanting the blue team to get upset with you (and the crew)?

Do you have a rule reference?

So, here we go with the "common sense" vs. "rule" argument. Color me old and grumpy, but I see one major flaw with the argument. It goes completely against 4-36. Yep, one team got screwed out of a score because the official made the mistake of blowing the whistle when they should not have. Too bad - there's a rule to fix that. Once they feel the heat, I'll bet they don't do that again.

So, you give the ball to blue because they might get upset? If I'm white's coach, I'm really going to get upset that you're compounding a screwup with completely ignoring a specific rule. You're going to be getting heat one way or the other, so why not get it right one of those times? And if the heat's too bad, there's a rule to fix that as well.

Look, I understand the issue of rec leagues, camp situation etc. And, if the whistle happend so close to blue getting the ball, I would have no problem with blue ending up with possession. But as I read the OP, the whistle sounded well before blue ended up with it, so white still has team control, and white will have the throw-in.

I agree with your premise. I am tired of everything we do is not to piss someone off. We already pissed someone off by making an obvious mistake. Why compound it by not following the rules in this case?

Peace