Timeout/Layup = technical foul

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If the player travels the length of the court, by-passing one or more officials along the way, and shoots a layup before heading to his bench, it could easily be considered delaying the game.

How?? The game is stopped for the next 30 or 60 seconds. Nothing is going to happen anyway. So how he delaying anything?

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

How?? The game is stopped for the next 30 or 60 seconds. Nothing is going to happen anyway. So how he delaying anything?

The inevitable?

[VaTerp]

IMHO it's absolutely HORRENDOUS judgment and unjustifiable to call a technical foul in the situation as described in the original post.

It's calls like that that give officials a bad name and fuels the misguided perception some have that officials are out of touch and take away from the game.

I can see a T in the case someone else described where a guy jacks a shot that goes under the bleachers or something and refuses to go get it after repeated request. But in the situation described, any official who would issue a T or even begin to justify a T, is not someone I would want to work with and someone who truly DOES NOT GET IT.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

IMHO it's absolutely HORRENDOUS judgment and unjustifiable to call a technical foul in the situation as described in the original post.

It's calls like that that give officials a bad name and fuels the misguided perception some have that officials are out of touch and take away from the game.

I can see a T in the case someone else described where a guy jacks a shot that goes under the bleachers or something and refuses to go get it after repeated request. But in the situation described, any official who would issue a T or even begin to justify a T, is not someone I would want to work with and someone who truly DOES NOT GET IT.

Let me see if I can reply in like language.

Anyone who holds your opinion is not a REAL official just a fanboy or ex-coach who puts on a shirt and pretends. The official should not consider "the situation" and is not taking the game away from anyone. The misbehaving player is doing that. The REAL official properly does his job and penalizes such action with impartiality.

You are the one who gives officials a bad name.


How was that? Did you like those words?

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Let me see if I can reply in like language.

Anyone who holds your opinion is not a REAL official just a fanboy or ex-coach who puts on a shirt and pretends. The official should not consider "the situation" and is not taking the game away from anyone. The misbehaving player is doing that. The REAL official properly does his job and penalizes such action with impartiality.

You are the one who gives officials a bad name.


How was that? Did you like those words?

How's that? Do I like those words?

Ok tough guy, I'm not going there with you. I stand by my humble opinion. I've been a sports fan (not a fan boy or whatever that is) since I was 4, and yes I use to coach, but guess what? I am a "REAL" official. I couldn't care less what you say about that.

If you don't think officials should "consider the situation" you're fooling yourself. That's called LIFE. In the situation the OP described giving a T takes the game away from the players and coaches and puts it on a POOR JUDGMENT call from an official. PERIOD.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

How?? The game is stopped for the next 30 or 60 seconds. Nothing is going to happen anyway. So how he delaying anything?

So why not let him shoot around for the next 30 or 60 seconds?

This action is illegal. BillyMac quoted the proper rule about failing to pass the ball to the nearer official when it becomes dead. The proper penalty is a player technical foul for delaying the game. If you want to know exactly how, I would admit that is a tough explanation, but consider a two person crew. One official should be reporting the time-out and the other should be collecting the ball and heading to the ensuing throw-in spot. The coach of one of the teams may want to know this location before going into his huddle and drawing up a play. What if the player shooting the lay-up is from the other team and now this coach can't get his desired info in a timely manner because the official has to go collect the ball?

There was a POE or comment on this a few years ago when the editorial change was made in the language of this rule. I recall the NFHS making the point to not allow such behavior after the whistle.

My vote is WHACK.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

1)There was a POE or comment on this a few years ago when the editorial change was made in the language of this rule. I recall the NFHS making the point to not allow such behavior after the whistle.

2) My vote is WHACK.

1) I just opened up the 2000-01 rule book and the language was exactly the same. And I can't remember anything ever being issued about practicing during dead balls either. Can you furnish a cite to back this up? Including exactly what the NFHS said the penalty should be for not allowing such behavior after the whistle?

2) Gee, why aren't I surprised? It falls right in line with your insistence on it being OK to "T" up the crowd also if you feel like it, doesn't it?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There was a POE or comment on this a few years ago when the editorial change was made in the language of this rule. I recall the NFHS making the point to not allow such behavior after the whistle.

My vote is WHACK.

Then what's your position on this one, Nevada?

NFHS rule 5-12-5 states that players shall remain standing within the confines of the TO area during a 30-second TO. What do you do if the players sit down? WHACK? Note that the NFHS also made a point not to allow this particular behavior also.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Then what's your position on this one, Nevada?

NFHS rule 5-12-5 states that players shall remain standing within the confines of the TO area during a 30-second TO. What do you do if the players sit down? WHACK? Note that the NFHS also made a point not to allow this particular behavior also.

I think in both cases (the TO and the "practicing"), a T could reasonably be issued if the official directs the team/player to comply and they refuse. The fact that there's no specific penalty in the rules doesn't mean it can't be considered unsporting to disregard the official's instructions at this point.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I think in both cases (the TO and the "practicing"), a T could reasonably be issued if the official directs the team/player to comply and they refuse. The fact that there's no specific penalty in the rules doesn't mean it can't be considered unsporting to disregard the official's instructions at this point.

But unlike Nevada, you wouldn't call an immediate "T" for practicing without directing the team/player to comply first before issuing the "T"? Correct? Same for sitting during a 30-second TO?

It's a matter of WHACK versus Warn'n'WHACK.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

But unlike Nevada, you wouldn't call an immediate "T" for practicing without directing the team/player to comply first before issuing the "T"? Correct? Same for sitting during a 30-second TO?

It's a matter of WHACK versus Warn'n'WHACK.

Yes, I'd warn/direct compliance first. I like a good cup of tea as much as the next guy, but I'll be working middle school forever around here if I start looking for Ts like this and stretching the rules to call them.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

It's a matter of WHACK versus Warn'n'WHACK.

I vote for the later, but only where the player, or players, are being real knuckleheads (I tried to type in some other words instead of knuckleheads but just kept getting a bunch of asterisks). Let's have a poll.

[26 Year Gap]

A better solution is to report the timeout & start the clock right away so his coach can chew him out for goofing off instead of coming to the bench.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So why not let him shoot around for the next 30 or 60 seconds?

This does not address my question. How does one layup during the dead ball that starts a time-out delay the game? Maybe there is justification for a technical foul in this situation (although I don't think there is); but whatever the justification is, it CAN'T be that he is delaying the game.

And for those who say that the T is for failing to pass the ball immediately to the nearest official, you need to read the whole article. The T is for delaying the game by not passing the ball immediately to the nearest official. He's NOT delaying the game in any way.

[Camron Rust]

There is no "delay" here. The only applicable rule is the one prohibiting practice during a dead ball. Technically speaking, this player has violated this rule and the penalty would be a technical foul. In practice, this would not be a good call unless it persisted.