BC violation on tipped pass by offense

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Freddy

I understand and appreciate your question. The actual time during which I deemed there to have been player control was too brief to have granted a request for a timeout.

The point is not whether it was feasible to actually have requested a TO during the short window of time; the question asked is wether there was such a window.

Consider this, if A's coach is requesting TO, repeatedly, during this process, would you have granted it. The point of Nevada's question is simple, unless there was a window, no matter how brief, during which a TO could be granted, then you never had player control. Without player control, there is no team control, and thus no BC violation.

A controlled tap does not give you player control. If he grabbed it and threw it, then you were right.

On this play, I'd err on the side of no control.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The point is not whether it was feasible to actually have requested a TO during the short window of time; the question asked is wether there was such a window.

Consider this, if A's coach is requesting TO, repeatedly, during this process, would you have granted it. The point of Nevada's question is simple, unless there was a window, no matter how brief, during which a TO could be granted, then you never had player control. Without player control, there is no team control, and thus no BC violation.

A controlled tap does not give you player control. If he grabbed it and threw it, then you were right.

On this play, I'd err on the side of no control.

We have to get away from using this argument that if you would not grant a timeout then they didn't have team control. This works in some situations, but not all and is a bad way of thinking about this, IMHO. The time it takes to turn and recognize that it is the coach requesting a timeout is in many cases too long. A team could of had team control but lost it by the time you recognize the coach calling the timeout. Because I could not grant the timeout, does that mean the team did not have team control, if even briefly? No. All you need to know is did the player have control of the ball. If so, team control is established. There is no time requirement in the rule book for team control.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by rwest

We have to get away from using this argument that if you would not grant a timeout then they didn't have team control. This works in some situations,

IT works, in theory, in all situations. Intial player control and team control and ability to grant a time out all happen at the same time.

I agree that in practice, it would be difficult to request and be granted a TO in this brief instance, but it has happened.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

IT works, in theory, in all situations. Intial player control and team control and ability to grant a time out all happen at the same time.

I agree that in practice, it would be difficult to request and be granted a TO in this brief instance, but it has happened.

So by the definition that if you can call a time out there is team control, then there is no team control when team B requests a timeout but team A has a live ball inbounds. Team B can't call a timeout. I know no one is suggesting this. My only point is I don't like using when a timeout can be taken to define team control. Plus it's not needed. If you deem the player had control of the ball, then there is team control, no matter how much time transpired.

As to the OP, if I see a controlled pass by a player in the air, I'm going to interpret this as control. In order for a player to make a pass like this the ball had to come to rest in his hand, thereby, meeting the definition of control. He doesn't have to have two hands on the ball for control to be established.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rwest

If I see a controlled pass by a player in the air, I'm going to interpret this as control. In order for a player to make a pass like this the ball had to come to rest in his hand, thereby, meeting the definition of control. He doesn't have to have two hands on the ball for control to be established.

What? So if a long pass from A1 to A2 is in the air, halfway between A1 and A2, and someone from Team A requests a timeout, you, as an official will grant the request? So it wouldn't matter to you if a split second after the officials whistle to grant the timeout, B1 stole the pass was about to drive in for an uncontested layup. It sure would matter to the Team B coach.

Wow. If there ever was a job for the Mythbusters, this is certainly the job:

The head coach may request and be granted a timeout if his or her player is holding or dribbling the ball, or during a dead ball period.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What? So if a long pass from A1 to A2 is in the air, halfway between A1 and A2, and someone from Team A requests a timeout, you, as an official will grant the request? So it wouldn't matter to you if a split second after the officials whistle to grant the timeout, B1 stole the pass was about to drive in for an uncontested layup. It sure would matter to the Team B coach.

Wow. If there ever was a job for the Mythbusters, this is certainly the job:

The head coach may request and be granted a timeout if his or her player is holding or dribbling the ball, or during a dead ball period.

I said that if there is a controlled pass, then team control exists. I never said I'd grant a timeout after the pass. Team control and when a timeout can be granted are two separate issues. They are related, but still separate. All I said was that there is team control if I see a controlled pass. No where in what you quoted did I say I'd grant a time out.

[rwest]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What? So if a long pass from A1 to A2 is in the air, halfway between A1 and A2, and someone from Team A requests a timeout, you, as an official will grant the request? So it wouldn't matter to you if a split second after the officials whistle to grant the timeout, B1 stole the pass was about to drive in for an uncontested layup. It sure would matter to the Team B coach.

Wow. If there ever was a job for the Mythbusters, this is certainly the job:

The head coach may request and be granted a timeout if his or her player is holding or dribbling the ball, or during a dead ball period.

This just furthers my argument that we should not determine that team control exists when we would grant a timeout. Team control does exist on a pass, but we won't grant a timeout during a pass. So by some of the posters on this thread team control doesn't exist on a pass. Not if we use their principle of if you would grant a timeout then team control exists. Because if one is true then the corrollary is also true. Namely, that if you wouldn't grant a time out then team control doesn't exist. And this is blatantly not true.

[CMHCoachNRef]

Originally Posted by rwest

This just furthers my argument that we should not determine that team control exists when we would grant a timeout. Team control does exist on a pass, but we won't grant a timeout during a pass. So by some of the posters on this thread team control doesn't exist on a pass. Not if we use their principle of if you would grant a timeout then team control exists. Because if one is true then the corrollary is also true. Namely, that if you wouldn't grant a time out then team control doesn't exist. And this is blatantly not true.

In order for a time out to be called, PLAYER control must exist -- UNLESS the ball is at the disposal of the team requesting the time out.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

This just furthers my argument that we should not determine that team control exists when we would grant a timeout. Team control does exist on a pass, but we won't grant a timeout during a pass. So by some of the posters on this thread team control doesn't exist on a pass. Not if we use their principle of if you would grant a timeout then team control exists. Because if one is true then the corrollary is also true. Namely, that if you wouldn't grant a time out then team control doesn't exist. And this is blatantly not true.

Nobody said crap about determining team control with that, and no one tied team control to a timeout. The question is whether player control ever existed. Player control is a requirement to establish team control, sure, but team control itself is irrelevant for a timeout.

As Billy pointed out, team control continues until the ball becomes dead, a shot is released, or the other team gains player control.

Let me spell this out again.

In order to have a BC violation in the OP, PLAYER control has to have existed with the pass rather than just a tip, because player control estalblishes team control. Everytime. Team control is really all that's required for a BC violation, but team control can never exist until player control has existed.

Player control is the same thing that's required for a TO (except throwins, free throws and dead balls), so the principal is the same. Exactly the same.

Whether you'd grant a TO if a coach was requesting it while A1 briefly controlled it is, really, a topic for another thread. My point is, the rule is the same for both, so the theory works. Every time.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by rwest

If I see a controlled pass by a player in the air, I'm going to interpret this as control. In order for a player to make a pass like this the ball had to come to rest in his hand, thereby, meeting the definition of control. He doesn't have to have two hands on the ball for control to be established.

I'm still not sure what you're aiming at here. What you say is true, but I'm not sure why you're saying it, because what is being said can be misconstrued by those not well versed in basketball rules.

During an an "uncontrolled" pass, a fumble, a muff, a pass tipped by the defense, a ball dribbled off a foot, an interrupted dribble, etc., there is still team control until the ball is in flight during a try or tap for goal, an opponent secures control, or the ball becomes dead.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by rwest

We have to get away from using this argument that if you would not grant a timeout then they didn't have team control. This works in some situations, but not all and is a bad way of thinking about this, IMHO. The time it takes to turn and recognize that it is the coach requesting a timeout is in many cases too long. A team could of had team control but lost it by the time you recognize the coach calling the timeout. Because I could not grant the timeout, does that mean the team did not have team control, if even briefly? No. All you need to know is did the player have control of the ball. If so, team control is established. There is no time requirement in the rule book for team control.

Nor is there a time requirement for a time out to be granted. If Coach A is requesting it as A1 briefly gets control, I'm going to grant the time out, even if B1 steals it before my whistle blows. It's just like granting a TO after a made basket when the thrower has the ball by the time you blow the whistle. I'll have no problem explaining that to a coach.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by snaqwells

nor is there a time requirement for a time out to be granted. If coach a is requesting it as a1 briefly gets control, i'm going to grant the time out, even if b1 steals it before my whistle blows. It's just like granting a to after a made basket when the thrower has the ball by the time you blow the whistle. I'll have no problem explaining that to a coach.

+1