Never Say Always ???

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

10-3-5 PLAYER Technicals: Delay the game by acts such as:
a. Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play.

It's possibly left over from the time when a T was given only if a warning had been issued for that particular act.

For now, consider it the equivalent of 2-3 and stop obsessing about it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

10-3-5 PLAYER Technicals: Delay the game by acts such as:
a. Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play.

This rule leads me to believe that PLAYER technical fouls may possibly be charged when a delay of game infraction occurs after the first warning for any of the four delay of game situations.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's possibly left over from the time when a T was given only if a warning had been issued for that particular act.

For now, consider it the equivalent of 2-3 and stop obsessing about it.

It has a purpose. The key word is preventing as opposed to delaying.

I actually called it last year (only time in 16 years) when a player, after a made basket, swatted the ball into the 10th row. No delay warning had been called.

The difference is in the magnatude of the action...a delay such as holding the ball for 2-3 seconds or tapping away from the thrower vs. simply making it not available to the thrower at all.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

10-3-5 PLAYER Technicals: Delay the game by acts such as:
a. Preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play.
d. Repeated violations of the throw-in, as in 9-2-10.



What are some other situations where a PLAYER technical is charged if a delay of game infraction occurs after the first warning for any of the four delay of game situations? In other words, what are some situations where a PLAYER technical foul is charged for preventing the ball from being made live promptly or from being put in play; or repeated violations of the throw-in, as in 9-2-10?

The difference really does matter, especially in terms of the number of fouls a player has counted toward disqualification.



I’m really trying to understand is the purpose and intent of 10-3-5. When do we penalize PLAYERS, rather than a TEAM, for delay of game infractions? Is the general statement true to, "Always penalize with TEAM technical fouls if a delay of game infraction occurs after the first warning for any of the four delay of game situations." ?

Inquiring minds want to know.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

It's possibly left over from the time when a T was given only if a warning had been issued for that particular act.

For now, consider it the equivalent of 2-3 and stop obsessing about it.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It has a purpose. The key word is preventing as opposed to delaying.

I actually called it last year (only time in 16 years) when a player, after a made basket, swatted the ball into the 10th row. No delay warning had been called.

The difference is in the magnatude of the action...a delay such as holding the ball for 2-3 seconds or tapping away from the thrower vs. simply making it not available to the thrower at all.

The rule is there for specific situations such as the following:

2000-01 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 13: A1 is at the free-throw line to shoot a free throw. The lead official bounces the ball to A1, and B1, who is in one of the free-throw lane spaces, a) reaches out and intercepts the bounce pass without breaking the vertical plane of the free-throw lane with either foot and then requests a time-out; or b) breaks the vertical plane of the free-throw lane and intercepts the bounce pass and then requests a time-out. RULING: This is NOT a warning for delay situation, as outlined by Rule 4-46. In both situations, a technical foul shall be called for B1 delaying the game by preventing the ball from being put in play. (10-3-7a)

Billy, can you guess where I found that ruling?