If an official hands the ball to the shooter during the front end of a one and one, can a lane violation be called before the act of shooting?

If it's a violation by the shooting team, the ball becomes dead immediately, otherwise it should be delayed.

A lane violation may be called anytime after the ball is at the disposal of the shooter.

BTW - what's the official doing "handing" the ball to the shooter anyway?

At levels of less skill, we may pass on a violation.
mick

Or at higher levels or skill we may say no advantage gained if they step in and back out and pass on a violation.

At "?some?" level, we may follow all the rules. ;)

Okay, I thought about this for awhile, and finally decided to contribute my 1 cent worth.

I've said this before, but I'm telling you, the whole idea of advantage/disadvantage just sets up referees for more criticism. I understand why you say you may not call a lane violation, devdog, but if the shooter misses the free throw after the "uncalled violation", what's the first thing you're going to hear from the coaches and fans? Right or wrong, they're going to wonder why you didn't call the violation. I mean the FT shooter may be a 30% shooter, but they're not going to see it that way.

Honestly, I understand you can't call every ticky-tack contact, etc - you have to draw the line somewhere. But, just realize, the more a referee depends on advantage/disadvantage and accumulatory contact in deciding what fouls/violations to call, the more criticism the referee is going to hear.

I think that both of mick's answers above cover it perfectly.You can let it go at a level where it is still a mainly learning/teaching process.You call it at a level where the participants know the rule.The coaches at these levels usually have a pretty fair idea of what we are doing,and why.
JMO.

You haven't been doing this very long, have you? :)

I agree, i feel advantage/disadvantage is the key, if it isn't, what is? Why do we officiate? So, the game is played fairly. hwo do we keep it fair, by calling things which in our judgement would result in an advantage or a disadvantage.

Doug,
I wouldn't be totally comfortable using A/D in the instance of such a lane violation, or most violations for that matter, ... in most games.

But Advantage/Disadvantage, with regard to violations, is a whole 'nother subject.

mick

Just to make sure I don't mislead anybody, I'm not a ref, just a lowly howler monkey. Since coming here I've learned a lot. In fact, I spent some of last weekend reading the NFHS case book. I'm not real enlightened, though; its the 2001-2002 version.

Anyway, since we're talking about ad/disad, how do you reconcile those kinds of calls within a refereeing team for a given game? Do you discuss those kinds of things in your pre-game?

I had a nice e-mail from one of the regulars here, describing how NCAA officials manage ad/disad. But, it made me wonder - do the organizations you're associated with discuss suggested practices for ad/disad and other judgmental items? Would make it a lot easier if you had guidelines to follow.

I bet you are just a coach and <u>not an HM</u>.

Yes, we pre-game the A/D principles. It seems that the more experienced officials have longer and deeper pre-games.
The pre-game is the "mind stretching" that warms it up so we don't get brain cramps.

The basic premise of A/D is to make a determination if some "contact" affected the result of an action.
A "slow whistle" usually indicates that the official is using the A/D principle and is waiting to see the result.

There has been lengthy discussion and disagreement on how far to carry the A/D principles into the areas of calling or passing on violations.

mick

i totally agree mick

Welcome anway! ;)

Quote:

In fact, I spent some of last weekend reading the NFHS case book. I'm not real enlightened, though; its the 2001-2002 version.

That's not a problem. The case book really doesn't change very much from year to year. There may be the occasional rule change that affects it but for the most part, it doesn't change much. So continue to study!

Quote:

Anyway, since we're talking about ad/disad, how do you reconcile those kinds of calls within a refereeing crew for a given game? Do you discuss those kinds of things in your pre-game?

Without discussing how we plan to call the game, we would truly be 3 blind mice. We discuss discuss Points of Emphasis, like handchecking. How much contact are we going to allow before we call it? All 3 have to be on the same page. We discuss post play, screens, block/charge, etc. You name it, we talk about it.

Quote:

I had a nice e-mail from one of the regulars here, describing how NCAA officials manage ad/disad. But, it made me wonder - do the organizations you're associated with discuss suggested practices for ad/disad and other judgmental items? Would make it a lot easier if you had guidelines to follow.

For the most part, each individual official has to develop his own judgment, with the confines of the rules. But still, the crew must be consistent. That's why we discuss it prior to the game. We discuss it and then allow the first few calls of the game to set the tone.

The rule book requires us to consider advantage/disadvantage. We can't call every single bit of contact. That's why the term incidental contact is in the rule book as well.