NCAA rules - basket in and out

[bearclause]

Looked in the case book and rulebook - can't seem to find anything definitive and thought I would ask here.

Pretty simple. Ball goes into the hoop and completely past the ring without interference of any kind. It then hits net and freakishly bounces backwards through the rim.

At what point is this considered a made goal? I'm sort of reading the rule, and it almost seems that it's considered a made goal when it either passes through or somehow gets stuck in the net. Is that right?

Section 33. Goal
Art. 1. A goal shall be made when:
a. A live ball that is not a throw-in enters the basket from above and
remains in or passes through; or
b. A free throw enters the basket from above and remains in or passes
through.
Art. 2. Whether the game clock is running or stopped shall have no influence
on the counting of a goal.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bearclause

Ball goes into the hoop and completely past the ring without interference of any kind. It then hits net and freakishly bounces backwards through the rim.

I'm sort of reading the rule, and it almost seems that it's considered a made goal when it either passes through or somehow gets stuck in the net. Is that right?

Section 33. Goal
Art. 1. A goal shall be made when:
a. A live ball that is not a throw-in enters the basket from above and
remains in or passes through

Yes, that's right.

[APG]

Originally Posted by bearclause

Looked in the case book and rulebook - can't seem to find anything definitive and thought I would ask here.

Pretty simple. Ball goes into the hoop and completely past the ring without interference of any kind. It then hits net and freakishly bounces backwards through the rim.

At what point is this considered a made goal? I'm sort of reading the rule, and it almost seems that it's considered a made goal when it either passes through or somehow gets stuck in the net. Is that right?

Section 33. Goal
Art. 1. A goal shall be made when:
a. A live ball that is not a throw-in enters the basket from above and
remains in or passes through; or
b. A free throw enters the basket from above and remains in or passes
through.
Art. 2. Whether the game clock is running or stopped shall have no influence
on the counting of a goal.

The ball must clear the net for it to be counted.

Art. 1. A goal shall be made when:
a. A live ball that is not a throw-in enters the basket from above and remains in or passes through

And the definition of the basket is:

Rule 4 Definitions, Section 4. Basket
Art. 1. Each basket consists of an 18-inch ring, its flange and braces, and appended net through which players attempt to throw or tap the ball.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The ball must clear the net for it to be counted.

Not necessarily.

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Art. 1. A goal shall be made when:
a. A live ball that is not a throw-in enters the basket from above and remains in or passes through

And the definition of the basket is:

Rule 4 Definitions, Section 4. Basket
Art. 1. Each basket consists of an 18-inch ring, its flange and braces, and appended net through which players attempt to throw or tap the ball.

Obviously, this doens't apply to the OP, however, as the ball did not remain in the basket.

[bearclause]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Obviously, this doens't apply to the OP, however, as the ball did not remain in the basket.

That the rule accounted for that already occurred to me.

It does always seem freakish when a ball rolls most of the way down the rim and spins out, but that the net might do it seems to be exceedingly rare although I've heard of it happening twice in the same week. What I recall is the ball burying itself to the back of the net, and some strange action causing it to whip around and the new momentum of the ball then directed it out. How this happens would seem to be very much dependent on tiny little things, such as the age, stiffness, or precise shape of the nets.

Also - I remember seeing a missed free throw attempt last week that lodged itself between the rim and the backboard. It was strange too. It softly bounced on the front of the ring, then on the side of the ring, and finally just jammed itself into the side of the rim. Of course it was just a possession arrow situation, although I can't for the life of me figure out why it should be.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bearclause

Also - I remember seeing a missed free throw attempt last week that lodged itself between the rim and the backboard. It was strange too. It softly bounced on the front of the ring, then on the side of the ring, and finally just jammed itself into the side of the rim. Of course it was just a possession arrow situation, although I can't for the life of me figure out why it should be.

What else could it be?

The ball is not in control of either team. The ball is in contact with the rim...which means it would be basket interference for either team to contact the ball. Even without a specific rule as we have , the only out is for the referee to blow it dead...otherwise the two teams would both stand there and dare the other to knock it free. Since there has been no infraction that would award the ball to one team or the other the only option is to go to the arrow.

[bearclause]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

What else could it be?

The ball is not in control of either team. The ball is in contact with the rim...which means it would be basket interference for either team to contact the ball. Even without a specific rule as we have , the only out is for the referee to blow it dead...otherwise the two teams would both stand there and dare the other to knock it free. Since there has been no infraction that would award the ball to one team or the other the only option is to go to the arrow.

Well - it occurs to me that if a team shoots the ball and misses it so badly that it wedges on the side of the rim, it might be considered an "infraction" with possession awarded to the defensive team. Would anyone really object if the rule were changed?

Specifically for free-throws - isn't an otherwise live ball that completely misses the rim/flange awarded to the defensive team?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bearclause

Well - it occurs to me that if a team shoots the ball and misses it so badly that it wedges on the side of the rim, it might be considered an "infraction" with possession awarded to the defensive team. Would anyone really object if the rule were changed?

Specifically for free-throws - isn't an otherwise live ball that completely misses the rim/flange awarded to the defensive team?

But it didn't completely miss. And it doesn't take a bad miss to get there. Some of those occurrences hit the iron in what look like normal shots....just like the one you described.

The point of it being a violation for completely missing is so that the shooter can't just throw the ball to his teammate and call it a miss.

The ball getting wedged is neither good nor bad. Neither team deserves the ball more than the other...hence, the AP makes sense.

Note that exactly the same ruling applies if this happens in the normal course of play....even on a shot that may or may not be tipped by the defense or even if it was not even a shot at all (a deflected pass, for example). To change the FT rule only just adds complexity.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

To change the FT rule only just adds complexity.

Camron:

And we both know that the NCAA and NFHS do not want to make the rules any more complex than they already are. ROFLMAO

MTD, Sr.

[bearclause]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Camron:

And we both know that the NCAA and NFHS do not want to make the rules any more complex than they already are. ROFLMAO

MTD, Sr.

I understand that the definition of traveling for a player on the ground simplifies to either rolling over or getting up, rather than the ref trying to establish where the pivot foot is or whether or not a foot was dragged.

I know NCAA recently changed the goaltend rule such that once a shot attempt hits the backboard, it's assumed to be on its downward flight. Most shots seem to have backspin, so I suppose it's rare for a ball hitting the backboard to still be on the way up although it's not impossible. That was always rather hard to judge, although it's always been tough trying to figure out if a shot was on the way down even without hitting the backboard.