Possesion Arrow Error

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) No, I'm just using the play we're supposed to be discussing....the one described in post #6 of this thread. I'm answering that post solely. Are you?

No! No one is discussing post number 6!!!! How many times do we have to go over it? We are talking about a different situation in which a technical foul occurs and then it takes the official longer than normal to call it. You said some stupid stuff and you know it, stop trying to hide behind post #6.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Cobra

No! No one is discussing post number 6!!!!

Some of us thought we were. And at least one of us misread it, which changes everything as far as I'm concerned.

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Wasn't there a ruling once on 6 players in the game that might be illustrative? Indicating that all points scored must count, in spite of the fact that the T was "committed" prior to the try.

When does this foul occur? Just having 6 players does not make the ball dead.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Cobra and jar - let's change the play ever so slightly. Instead of B2 hitting a 3-pointer, they go up and slam the ball home, with authority. If the ball is indeed dead, would you charge B2 with a second T for purposely dunking a dead ball?

Of course it isn't a foul. Do you call technical fouls on a dunk ending at the end of the period when the horn goes off .1 seconds before the dunk? What is there is a foul by the offense which causes the ball to become dead .1 seconds before there is a dunk? What if the player commits basket interference while grabbing the ball and dunks it on the way down?

Originally Posted by youngump

Suppose A2 commits a technical foul before A3 releases the shot. Suppose for example he vulgarly swears in his non-English mother tongue at the official. Now suppose that 4 minutes later the ball becomes dead and the official asks another official what the term means and that official explains it. Are you suggesting the ball was dead for that shot and for all of the subsequent 4 minutes?

I'm guessing that the answer is no because you don't believe you can go back and get the technical? If the answer is yes, please explain what the limits would be.
If the answer is no, then would it be fair to characterize your difference simply as to how far back you can go to penalize the action. Or is there something more fundamental you are arguing?

That is way to long to go back and call a foul. In the play being discussed it is a couple of seconds later not 4 minutes. But if the official did call the foul it would be correct under the rules as there is no set amount of time that the foul must be called in.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

And that practical limit is stated quite clearly - once the throw-in ends, it is too late.

That is the time limit to correct the throw in. There is no limit under the rules for calling fouls.

Originally Posted by rockyroad

So - again - let me see if I have this right (according to your interp)...

Team A is late coming out of timeout...Officials mistakenly allow team B to throw ball in...team B hits a 3 pointer...team A goes down and hits their own 3 pointer...team B comes back and turns ball over...team A goes down and scores 2...team B calls a timeout...Coach A then says "Hey wait a minute! That throw in should have been ours!"

You are sure - right down to your toes - that B did it on purpose...so you will now cancel A's 5 points, B's 3 points, call a T on the B Coach, administer the two shots and give A the ball at mid-court opposite for a throw in????

Do you put time back on the clock?

If the official calls the foul then yes, the ball was dead when the foul occurred. The clock would have to be rest, if the officials know the time, as it should have never started.

Originally Posted by just another ref

Some of us thought we were. And at least one of us misread it, which changes everything as far as I'm concerned.

Ok, not a big deal. Jurassic Referee said things which go against the rules in 5 separate posts about the play where the foul was called several seconds after it occurred. But now he just ignores the fact that that play even exists. If someone says "it's not too late to call the technical foul" he will say "there is no technical foul in post #6."

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Cobra

If the official calls the foul then yes, the ball was dead when the foul occurred. The clock would have to be reset, if the officials know the time, as it should have never started.

The officials can correct, with definite knowledge, an obvious error by the timer. In this play, the official gave the ball to the wrong team, the throw-in was complete. I assume this means the signal was given and the clock was properly started. If the official does decide at this point to call a T for devious behavior, a call which gets harder and harder for me to swallow, there is no obvious error by the timer to correct.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Cobra

No! No one is discussing post number 6!!!! .

Actually, they are - you might want to go back and re-read the entire thread. The entire discussion is based on the situation described in post #6 and Cam's assertion that a T should have been called based on coach V's statement after the fact and any intervening action canceled.

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The officials can correct, with definite knowledge, an obvious error by the timer.

The clock can also be corrected when it malfunctions or is not started or stopped properly.

Originally Posted by just another ref

I assume this means the signal was given and the clock was properly started. If the official does decide at this point to call a T for devious behavior, a call which gets harder and harder for me to swallow, there is no obvious error by the timer to correct.

The timer did his job and started the clock when signaled to do so, but just because the official signals the clock to start does not mean that it started properly. Like if 3 free throws are awarded and the official signals for the clock to start after the second free throw....timer did not error as he was signaled to start the clock, yet the time may be corrected as the clock was not started properly. It is the same idea on the play being discussed.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Cobra

The timer did his job and started the clock when signaled to do so, but just because the official signals the clock to start does not mean that it started properly. Like if 3 free throws are awarded and the official signals for the clock to start after the second free throw....timer did not error as he was signaled to start the clock, yet the time may be corrected as the clock was not started properly. It is the same idea on the play being discussed.

Actually, it isn't. Starting the clock after the second of three free throws is an error, whether it was signaled or not. Starting the clock after a throw-in, even if it is soon to be followed by a questionable technical foul call, is not.

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Starting the clock after a throw-in

Can you have a throw-in while the ball is dead?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

Actually, they are - you might want to go back and re-read the entire thread. The entire discussion is based on the situation described in post #6 and Cam's assertion that a T should have been called based on coach V's statement after the fact and any intervening action canceled.

Yes, I was discussing 6 with a modification...the point that the T should have been called when coach V said what he said and if the official wasn't quick enough to sound the whistle before the release, but just after, the T still occurred before the release and the ball was dead.

The point I was making that Jurassic steadfastly refused to budge on is that the officials whistle doesn't have to beat the release to kill the shot. And he eventually came around to admitting that.

Not once have I suggested doing anything any later as others keep trying to claim I'm saying. I've tried to make that clear on several posts.

Over and over, I've said I'm talking about a timing race between the whistle for T vs. the shot....which, for anyone that actually read the posts, should have been obvious. I used terms like "moment", "one or two seconds", etc. Every example play I presented to demonstrate my point was a bang-bang-bang play where the infraction under question, the shot, and the whistle were one right after the other.

Once you've moved on and hit the point where coach H (in the original #6) got the T, it is definitely too late to go back and do anything...I've NEVER said otherwise.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

The point I was making that Jurassic steadfastly refused to budge on is that the officials whistle doesn't have to beat the release to kill the shot. And he eventually came around to admitting that.

Um no, JR refused to budge on your post #9 which was direct answer to post #6. I don't agree with your response in that post, especially your trying to use a case play that isn't applicable. You're the one that then went off on a tangent, not me.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Cobra

You really don't get it. You don't understand live ball/dead ball. Not knowing all the rules isn't a big deal, but you should try to learn them instead of just arguing incorrectly.

6-7-7 says that the ball becomes dead or remains dead when a foul occurs (there are exceptions to this regarding tries and taps but they are not important for this play.) Notice that the ball becomes dead when the foul occurs not when the official sounds his whistle.

The official knows that the team is stepping out of bounds with the intent to get the ball when they know it isn't theirs. Right then the foul occurs. What did we say happens when a foul occurs? The ball remains dead. So the player then receives the ball from one of the officials and everyone runs around like the ball is live even though it is actually dead. The ball is passed around, the ball ends up going through the basket. Even though the players were acting as if the ball was live it was actually dead the entire time so it is not a goal.

Just remember that all fouls are called retroactively. The foul occurs which causes the ball to become or remain dead. At some point after that the official will call the foul. If the ball goes though the basket before the official calls the foul it doesn't count as a score because the ball was actually dead.

Cobra, right there is all that I need to know about you and your rules knowledge. According to you, the foul occured when the wrong thrower stepped out of bounds. The official then wrongfully administered the throw-in. The throw-in ended and a team went down and shot the 3-pointer. The shot was good. After the made shot, a coach argued and got a "T". During the time between the player stepping out of bounds for the throw-in and the technical foul being called after the made 3-pointer, there was no whistle. Aamof I still can't find in post #6 where anybody EVER blew a whistle for the technical foul on the thrower. But you still insist that the ball was dead by rule all through that lengthy time interval.

The throw-in never happened according to you.

I'm kinda wondering why the other coach would get upset and get the T" after the made 3-pointer once you told him the throw-in never happened, the 3-pointer was no good and he was getting 2 free throws and the ball. You'd think he'd be kinda happy about that rather than being pissed off, wouldn't you?

As I said, that's all I need to know about you and your rules knowledge.

Yo Camron, your thoughts on this? Seriously.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Cobra

No! No one is discussing post number 6!!!! How many times do we have to go over it? We are talking about a different situation in which a technical foul occurs and then it takes the official longer than normal to call it. You said some stupid stuff and you know it, stop trying to hide behind post #6.

Look, the fact is JR was talking about Post #6. You were discussing post #6 plus Camron's wrinkle.
You were talking past each other. The sooner you guys realize this the sooner you can go back to whatever it was you were doing.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Cobra

That is way to long to go back and call a foul.

...as there is no set amount of time that the foul must be called in.



There is no limit under the rules for calling fouls.

Do you even realize the fact that you are contradicting yourself???

That is way too long - BUT there is no time limit.

Good grief.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Um no, JR refused to budge on your post #9 which was direct answer to post #6. I don't agree with your response in that post, especially your trying to use a case play that isn't applicable. You're the one that then went off on a tangent, not me.

No, in post 9, I said " The fact that the coach said something the moment it was inbounds indicates they did it on purpose. That is an unsporting T."

That was to indicate the foul occurred the moment the coach said it and was called right then. It was not a direct answer to #6 as if it were tagged on the end of everything in #6. You claimed the whistle had to sound before the release...and it doesn't.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

.......
Over and over, I've said I'm talking about a timing race between the whistle for T vs. the shot....which, for anyone that actually read the posts, should have been obvious. I used terms like "moment", "one or two seconds", etc. Every example play I presented to demonstrate my point was a bang-bang-bang play where the infraction under question, the shot, and the whistle were one right after the other.

Once you've moved on and hit the point where coach H (in the original #6) got the T, it is definitely too late to go back and do anything...I've NEVER said otherwise.

No argument here Cam. As I've before, if it's reasonably prompt - all occurs within a second or two - we can sell it pretty effectively, and I think that most of us agree that anything much beyond that is going to be too late.

My concerns with this specific situation are:

1. The officials really screwed the pooch on this one. It's their job to know which team gets the ball after the TO, and this is doubly important in a close game down the stretch. If they'd paid attention and done their job correctly, the situation never would have occurred.

2. Is a T justified in this situation? Certainly the comment by coach V is suspicious, but IMHO it is not enough in and of itself to justify a T. What was the context? Maybe he just realized at the last second his team was mistakenly given the ball for throw-in. You'd think that if it was a deliberate act, he'd be smart enough to not overtly attract attention to it....playing dumb would be a much smarter approach. I think it's one of those HTBT situations.......

3. Ambiguities and outright contradictions within the NFHS rules and interpretations. There's plenty of parallels within the rules that place a time limit on when a penalty can be assessed - for example, an illegal sub becomes a player once the ball becomes live and you can no longer penalize. Does anything similar apply here? How does the official wrongly giving the ball to a thrower from the wrong team affect it? Does it fall into the "when occurred" or "when discovered" category?

A key issue in this discussion is "did the ball become live?" Rule 6-1-2-b says it becomes live on a throw-in, when it is at the disposal of the thrower. If we proceed to throw-in administration, 7-6-2 says "The throw-in starts when the ball is at the disposal of a player of the team entitled to the throw-in." At face value, you'd expect that this means the ball isn't live until both the above conditions are satisfied, but we have a case play that directly contradicts that, saying that we can't correct giving the ball to the wrong team for throw-in once the throw in ends. Yes, the specific case involves an AP situation, but it doesn't specifically limit itself to that situation as some case interps clearly do, implying that it would be valid for any wrong team throw-in administration error by the official - this is further supported by the fact giving the ball to the wrong team for throw-in is not included in the list of correctable errors specified by rule. How can a throw in end if according to 7-6-2 it never started? In the case of a made basket it's clear the ball doesn't become live until it's at the disposal of the team entitled to the throw-in, but from the interp it appears that on a throw-in administered by an official that's not necessarily the case, and at least some of the time the ball becomes live when given to the thrower, whether they're from the correct team or not. Like I said, ambiguous and contradictory.....a little consistency would be nice......