Interesting Technical Situation

[Ignats75]

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

2-3 states that "The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

It is a slippery slope to use this rule to make the situation conform to one's sense of fairness when one perceives fairness to be at odds with a procedure specifically covered in the rules.

2-3 is not a royal charter, nor a grant of omnipotence to the R, nor are the rules writers authorizing a do-over.

Don't worry. My shoes are sticky. I won't slide down the slope. Ummm, if I'm not mistaken, we are charged as officials to ensure the game is adjudicated fairly.

THe Intent and Purpose of the Rules (pg 7 of rule book)
The restrictions which the rules place upon the players are intended to create a balance of play; to provide equal opportunity between the offense and the defense; to provide equal opportunity between the small player and tall player; to provide reasonable safety and protection; to create an atmosphere of sporting behavior and fair play; and to emphasize cleverness and skill without unduly limiting freedom of action of individual or team play on either offense or defense.
Therefore, it is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not intended by a rule.

Originally Posted by amusedofficial

Oh, and if someone starts lecturing me to "don't effin" this that or the other thing as the first words out of his/her mouth in pregame, I'm going to have questions about his/her professionalism.

Ummm, obviously, you are reading that without the context of how its said. I appreciate that you don't know me and would automatically assume I must be some sort of heathen. Believe me, I am fairly well known within the two associations I work and tend to say things with humour. (Think Padgett but I am much better looking) It still remains though, that its the first thing I mention in a pregame because I have been burned a few times.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The technical foul is not charged to any specific individual. It is a TEAM technical foul per 10-1-6.

I agree that's the penalty if a T is assessed.

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by rgncjn

Watched this situation unfold the other evening at a local high school varsity boys game.

Team A turns the ball over in their front court. Substitute B6 has reported to the scorer and is waiting to enter the game. The center official (opposite table) sounds his whistle, sticks his hand to up signal to the other official to hold play. Substitute B6 is beckoned on to the playing court by the center official.

B6 enters the court and reports to B1 that he is being replaced. During this, the new trail official has administered the ball for the throw-in that Team B recieved as a result of Team A's turnover. Play is stopped instantly when the trail official realizes that Team B has 6 players on the court.

A technical foul is assessed to Team B for having more than five players on the court.

Is this an administrative technical for having more than five players on the court? Is this a technical foul in B6 for entering the court (even though he was beckoned)? Is this a technical foul on B1 for not leaving the court?

The official who beckoned B6 on to the floor did not come in and tell the calling official that he beckoned him on, and instead went ahead and agreed with assessing the technical foul.

When I spoke to one of the officials after the game (a good friend), I asked how they assessed the technical foul. He said that they charged the technical to B1 for not promptly leaving the court. Rules citation?

This is a case of officials not being on the same sheet of music. A total communication breakdown. Effective Communication between partner is a must. The trail fell asleep and I would have not given a T in this case due to the fact that C clearly had his hand up to allow the sub in. It is also up to the C to relay the information to his partner that he indeed beckoned the sub on the floor. Once again, EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

This is what isn't clear in the OP. Did C signal that play was ready to begin? Was C under the impression the ball was again live? Or was, in his mind, the ball still dead because he was waiting for the substitution to be complete?

Whether C is using proscribed mechanics or not, if the ball is dead in his mind, he has the ability to say "I'm still holding up play for this to complete. The ball never became live."

Obviously if I'm standing on the court with my hand up like I should be in the situation it's much easier to explain, but regardless, the ball is dead if I (as an official) want it to be.

[walter]

The C sounded his whistle, beckoned the sub, and was holding up play. It is not clear from the OP whether he had his hand in the air or not. Either way, if I'm the C, as soon as I see the ball in play, I'm blowing the whistle hard, resetting everything, and then playing on. To me a "T" here is wrong. I do not see this as 6 participating and can easily differentiate those situations from the OP. I agree 2-3 can be a dangerous and slippery slope but here the C obviously was not ready for play to resume.

[Clark Kent]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

I had this exact situation in my game last week. I was in C standing at mid court holding my hand up to stop play as I turned and watched the replace player begin to trot to the bench at the other end of the court. As he passed me I watched him and then looked to the end line where my partner had just put the ball in play. My partner looked at the player trotting off the court, then looked at me with my hand up. No one said a word, except in the locker room where my partner apologized for not seeing my hand up. We couldn't justify giving the team a T for our mistake.

If my partner would have acted like he was going to I would have blown my whistle and come in and emphatically informed him of the entire situation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree that's the penalty if a T is assessed.

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

Exactly!

[Back In The Saddle]

IMHO, this is a crew screw up. The players did everything right. If there's a T, it's a team T on the crew. There is no way the crew can justify a T on the substituting team here.

One of the realities of officiating is that there is (almost) always a correct way to do something, and a (sometimes) a right way to do it. The difference between a really good official and a great one is the ability to do the right things when required. Doing that absolutely requires knowing the correct way. It also requires the ability to discern when the correct thing is the wrong thing. Then you need to have the stones, presence, credibility and people skills to pull it off.

But this OP is really simple and routine. It is each official's responsibility to ensure this never happens. All three officials screwed this up.

[Ignats75]

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle

IMHO, this is a crew screw up. The players did everything right. If there's a T, it's a team T on the crew. There is no way the crew can justify a T on the substituting team here.

One of the realities of officiating is that there is (almost) always a correct way to do something, and a (sometimes) a right way to do it. The difference between a really good official and a great one is the ability to do the right things when required. Doing that absolutely requires knowing the correct way. It also requires the ability to discern when the correct thing is the wrong thing. Then you need to have the stones, presence, credibility and people skills to pull it off.

But this OP is really simple and routine. It is each official's responsibility to ensure this never happens. All three officials screwed this up.

Bravo!

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Exactly!

Ditto.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree that's the penalty if a T is assessed.

In the OP -- if the C still had his/her hand up, waiting for B1 to leave, then the ball never became live, despite U2's best efforts. No T, reset everything, administer the throw-in.

If C dropped his hand, indicating play should resume, and the U2 administers the throw-in, then you have no choice but to assess the T.

(Of course, maybe it's a stretch to assume C used proper mechanics. So, change the above to "if C knew before the ball became live that B1 hadn't left, no T. Otherwise T.")

The ball becomes live on the throw-in when the administering official, the T in this case, places it at the disposal of the thrower. That's the rule. This has nothing to do with what the C or L are doing. The C can't prevent the ball from becoming live if the T puts it in play. The best that the C can do is blow the whistle as he observes the T handing the ball to the thrower, at any point after that, it is too late.

The crew screwed up. The team gets penalized. No one likes it, including me, but that's how the rules work. We don't get to set them aside when we don't like them.

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The ball becomes live on the throw-in when the administering official, the T in this case, places it at the disposal of the thrower. That's the rule. This has nothing to do with what the C or L are doing. The C can't prevent the ball from becoming live if the T puts it in play. The best that the C can do is blow the whistle as he observes the T handing the ball to the thrower, at any point after that, it is too late.

The crew screwed up. The team gets penalized. No one likes it, including me, but that's how the rules work. We don't get to set them aside when we don't like them.

I disagree. The ball is not live if I (as an official) want it dead. If I observe a foul, but drop my whistle, the ball is dead even if it takes me 5 seconds to blow the whistle.

Same here. I'm C. T administers the throw-in, it is still dead if I'm standing in the middle of the court, because, as an official, I have called the play dead. By your reasoning, the second T hands the ball to the thrower, it's too late. Even if I hit my whistle three times before he hands the ball. Because, by your reasoning, if he doesn't hear it and goes ahead and administers the throw-in, it's live.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by nevadaref

the ball becomes live on the throw-in when the administering official, the t in this case, places it at the disposal of the thrower. That's the rule. This has nothing to do with what the c or l are doing. The c can't prevent the ball from becoming live if the t puts it in play. The best that the c can do is blow the whistle as he observes the t handing the ball to the thrower, at any point after that, it is too late.

The crew screwed up. The team gets penalized. No one likes it, including me, but that's how the rules work. We don't get to set them aside when we don't like them.

a2d

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by jdw3018

I disagree. The ball is not live if I (as an official) want it dead. If I observe a foul, but drop my whistle, the ball is dead even if it takes me 5 seconds to blow the whistle.

Same here. I'm C. T administers the throw-in, it is still dead if I'm standing in the middle of the court, because, as an official, I have called the play dead. By your reasoning, the second T hands the ball to the thrower, it's too late. Even if I hit my whistle three times before he hands the ball. Because, by your reasoning, if he doesn't hear it and goes ahead and administers the throw-in, it's live.

Got a rules citation to back up your disagreement?

It is true that a foul or violation makes the ball dead, not the officials whistle per a rules fundamental, but the play which we are discussing here is going in the reverse direction.

We are talking rules here, not opinions.

[jdw3018]

No citation. Just the common sense that says while I am conducting an administrative procedure in which the ball is dead that another official handing the ball to a player isn't administering the throw in, it's simply handing a dead ball to a player.

If I grant a timeout just as an official is handing the ball to a player, but don't blow my whistle immediately, the ball never became live. In this instance, even though I didn't blow my whistle as the T is handing the ball, it never became live because I blew it dead again (even though I didn't blow my whistle right away).