NFHS Interpt.

[PAULK1]

The new interputations are out although they are still marked 2001-2002.

http://www.nfhs.org/sports/basketball_interp.htm

[AK ref SE]

Thanks for the site...it clears up a few of my questions

AK ref SE

[Brian Watson]

I found situation 4 interesting.

We have always used the following interp:

It is 1 indirect to the coach no matter how many players come off the bench. Although, each player off is charged with 1 flagrant T each. So, if three come off, they each get nailed with a Flagrant T, and 1 indirect is assessed to the coach.

This interp seems to indicate that an indirect is assessed for each player off the bench, or am I not reading it right?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Brian Watson
I found situation 4 interesting.

We have always used the following interp:

It is 1 indirect to the coach no matter how many players come off the bench. Although, each player off is charged with 1 flagrant T each. So, if three come off, they each get nailed with a Flagrant T, and 1 indirect is assessed to the coach.

This interp seems to indicate that an indirect is assessed for each player off the bench, or am I not reading it right?

An indirect T is charged to the head coach for EACH player that comes off the bench AND fights.If they just come off the bench without fighting,then it is one indirect T to the head coach,no matter how many are in that category.You then just add up the indirect T's- one for each player off the bench that fight,plus one for all the players off the bench that don't fight.Each player off the bench,whether they fight or not,also gets charged with a flagrant T.

In Sit4,the 3 players off the bench ALL fought-therefore there is an indirect T charged for each one of them.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Oct 16th, 2002 at 04:39 AM]

[Jake80]

Situation #14

A1 gains control of a pass while on one foot and then jumps to one foot followed by a step with the other foot. Traveling.

Is it still a travel if A1 gains control of the ball on one foot, jumps to one foot but releases the ball on a pass or shot before the other foot lands? I had posted a situation similar to this on another board last year. A1 gains control of a loose ball while on one foot, then hops and lands on the same foot. Most of the responses indicated this was a travel. Situation #14 seems to be almost the same. Does it matter if control is gained on one foot and the "hop" is landed on the same foot or with the alternate foot?

[Mark Dexter]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

In Sit4,the 3 players off the bench ALL fought-therefore there is an indirect T charged for each one of them.

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Oct 16th, 2002 at 04:39 AM]

Not exactly.

The situation states that A6-8 all became players (they were beckoned), therefore 3 of the players A1-5 must be bench personnel. The indirects to the head coach are for the 3 of A1-5 who fought.

Of course, in the end, all of the players and subs are ejected and A's coach is still tossed.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Mark Dexter

The situation states that A6-8 all became players (they were beckoned), therefore 3 of the players A1-5 must be bench personnel. The indirects to the head coach are for the 3 of A1-5 who fought.

Uh,what's the difference,Mark?Off the bench vs. bench personnel=same thing?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Jake80
Situation #14

A1 gains control of a pass while on one foot and then jumps to one foot followed by a step with the other foot. Traveling.

Is it still a travel if A1 gains control of the ball on one foot, jumps to one foot but releases the ball on a pass or shot before the other foot lands? I had posted a situation similar to this on another board last year. A1 gains control of a loose ball while on one foot, then hops and lands on the same foot. Most of the responses indicated this was a travel. Situation #14 seems to be almost the same. Does it matter if control is gained on one foot and the "hop" is landed on the same foot or with the alternate foot?

If a player hops and lands on the same foot, the pivot foot has moved (in excess of prescribed limits) -- that's traveling.

If a player hops and lands on a different foot -- the pivot foot has been lifted. The player is restricted in what he/she can do, but it's not a violation (yet).

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by bob jenkins


If a player hops and lands on the same foot, the pivot foot has moved (in excess of prescribed limits) -- that's traveling.

While I agree that it is traveling, I disagree with your reason. The pivot foot is not yet established when a player controls the ball and lands on one foot. It is only established when the other foot touches. This allows for the possiblity of the two-footed jump stop. If the pivot were establish when the first foot landed, the jump stop would be traveling (pivot lifted and returned). However, once landing on a single foot, the player has two choices: make it the pivot foot by stepping with the other or jump and land on both simultaneously--never having a pivot foot.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Camron Rust

While I agree that it is traveling, I disagree with your reason. The pivot foot is not yet established when a player controls the ball and lands on one foot. It is only established when the other foot touches. This allows for the possiblity of the two-footed jump stop. If the pivot were establish when the first foot landed, the jump stop would be traveling (pivot lifted and returned). However, once landing on a single foot, the player has two choices: make it the pivot foot by stepping with the other or jump and land on both simultaneously--never having a pivot foot.

THere's some case (4.traveling.alpha) in the book about a player catching the ball with both feet on the ground, then jumping and returning to the floor. The reasoning for the ruling (travelling) is something like "after the movement, one of the feet will retroactively be considered to be the pivot."

That's what I meant above.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

THere's some case (4.traveling.alpha) in the book about a player catching the ball with both feet on the ground, then jumping and returning to the floor. The reasoning for the ruling (travelling) is something like "after the movement, one of the feet will retroactively be considered to be the pivot."

That's what I meant above.

Case Book play 4.43.3SitB is the one Bob is referring to(I think).