The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Possesion Arrow Error (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/60419-possesion-arrow-error.html)

Loudwhistle Wed Jan 12, 2011 02:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M Guy (Post 714998)
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?

How would you prove that B2 knew it was a dead ball? From a player's perspective its a live ball, score with it!

M&M Guy Wed Jan 12, 2011 02:33pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref
No. He had no way of knowing the ball was dead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Loudwhistle (Post 715017)
How would you prove that B2 knew it was a dead ball? From a player's perspective its a live ball, score with it!

Is intent part of the rule?

just another ref Wed Jan 12, 2011 02:41pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M Guy (Post 715028)
Is intent part of the rule?

I would say it is. You used the word purposely in your original question.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 02:49pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715037)
I would say it is. You used the word purposely in your original question.

You may say it is, but the rule book disagrees. 10-3-3
dunk, or attempt to dunk, a dead ball.

rockyroad Wed Jan 12, 2011 02:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 714958)
It is no different from any other foul. The foul occurs and everyone continues to act as if the ball is live while the official is deciding if it was a foul or not. The only difference is this play took longer than normal for the foul to be called.



The rules don't say that there is a limit.

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?

just another ref Wed Jan 12, 2011 02:52pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715041)
You may say it is, but the rule book disagrees. 10-3-3
dunk, or attempt to dunk, a dead ball.

I'm familiar with the rule. I'm also familiar with the passage about intent and purpose of the rules. I also wouldn't call the T if the player dunked immediately after being called for traveling, perhaps thinking the whistle indicated a foul.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 02:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715045)
I'm familiar with the rule. I'm also familiar with the passage about intent and purpose of the rules. I also wouldn't call the T if the player dunked immediately after being called for traveling, perhaps thinking the whistle indicated a foul.

The intent of the rule committee is obviously that a throwin is not correctable once it's complete, yet some are wanting to use the technical foul rule to, essentially, override that intent.

rockyroad Wed Jan 12, 2011 03:01pm

Cobra - I would love to read your thoughts on my post #105.

just another ref Wed Jan 12, 2011 03:01pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715048)
The intent of the rule committee is obviously that a throwin is not correctable once it's complete, yet some are wanting to use the technical foul rule to, essentially, override that intent.

I personally do not favor the technical call. As someone said earlier, (you, I think) I would have a hard time calling a technical for this if I handed the player the ball. But if the call was made, I agree with the theory that the act of deception causes the ball to be dead at that point.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 03:09pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715051)
I personally do not favor the technical call. As someone said earlier, (you, I think) I would have a hard time calling a technical for this if I handed the player the ball. But if the call was made, I agree with the theory that the act of deception causes the ball to be dead at that point.

I agree in theory, but there is a practical time limit to how late you can make this call. At best, you could sell it if you hit the whistle with the ball in the air. Any time after that, though, and you are really stretching the rule. I'd say, again, about the same time it's too late to go back and get that travel is when it's too late to go back and get the T.

just another ref Wed Jan 12, 2011 03:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715054)
I agree in theory, but there is a practical time limit to how late you can make this call. At best, you could sell it if you hit the whistle with the ball in the air. Any time after that, though, and you are really stretching the rule. I'd say, again, about the same time it's too late to go back and get that travel is when it's too late to go back and get the T.

I agree with that, too. But if it's soon enough to make the T call, it's soon enough to cancel the shot.

Camron Rust Wed Jan 12, 2011 03:51pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715048)
The intent of the rule committee is obviously that a throwin is not correctable once it's complete, yet some are wanting to use the technical foul rule to, essentially, override that intent.

Not at all. The point was that a foul (ANY FOUL) that occurs before a shot kills the shot....the rest of the situation is irrelevant. The timing of the whistle doesn't matter....only the timing of the foul. The case play about the throwin is irrelevant...different situation.

Let's change the scenario....wrong team has the ball for a throw in. They throw it into A3. A1 calls you an MF just before A3 shoots the ball. You don't sound the whistle until after the release. Does the shot count or not? THAT is exactly the same as the situation we're talking about.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 03:54pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715072)
Not at all. The point was that a foul (ANY FOUL) that occurs before a shot kills the shot....the rest of the situation is irrelevant. The timing of the whistle doesn't matter....only the timing of the foul. The case play about the throwin is irrelevant...different situation.

Let's change the scenario....wrong team has the ball for a throw in. They throw it into A3. A1 calls you an MF just before A3 shoots the ball. You don't sound the whistle until after the release. Does the shot count or not? THAT is exactly the same as the situation we're talking about.

I've already offered this situation to show the same thing. You're right, if you think quickly enough to call the T here, it needs to be called quickly. I'd no more reach back and grab this T than I would reach back and grab a travel two passes before the shot attempt.

IMO, waiting until after the basket is made is too late, practically speaking, to call the T for an act that occurred during the throw-in.

M&M Guy Wed Jan 12, 2011 03:56pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715037)
I would say it is. You used the word purposely in your original question.

I used the word purposely to describe the action, not whether the player had knowledge of whether the ball was dead.

My point is, if you use the theory that you can "go back" and issue the T retroactively, you then must use all of the appropriate rules and penalize everything accordingly. And I assume you'll have fun explaining to to B's coach why they now have 2 T's, since the dunk happened during a dead ball.

7.5.2 Sit B covers the play in question exactly. The officials screwed up and allowed the wrong team to inbound the ball, so there is nothing that can be done once the throw-in is completed. It would be nice to find some way to mitigate the officials' screw up and go back in time to penalize someone else, but I have yet to see anyone post a rule or case that allows us to go back in time and penalize an act from a previous play. Once the throw-in is completed, the action that warranted the T was a previous play.

Granted, this may be an extreme example, but let's say you called a foul against team A with a couple of seconds left that put team B up 1 after the FT's. As the ball is being inbounded, team A's coach says something to you in Italian right before A1 brings the ball up and lauches a shot that goes in at the buzzer. As you count the basket, the scorekeeper (timer?) tells you that the coach just called your mother many nasty names in Italian. Obviously unsporting, but you didn't get it called in time. So you decide to retroactively call the T. Would you wipe out the basket for A, since the action that warranted the T happened before the basket, thus making the entire play a dead ball situation? Since that leaves team B up 1, the game is now over with team B winning?

just another ref Wed Jan 12, 2011 04:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M Guy (Post 715074)
I used the word purposely to describe the action, not whether the player had knowledge of whether the ball was dead.

I've never seen a dunk that wasn't done purposely.

Quote:

My point is, if you use the theory that you can "go back" and issue the T retroactively, you then must use all of the appropriate rules and penalize everything accordingly. And I assume you'll have fun explaining to to B's coach why they now have 2 T's, since the dunk happened during a dead ball.
I do not believe it is the intent of this rule to penalize a player who could not be reasonably expected to know the ball is dead. This would apply in this case, or if there was excessive noise making it hard to hear the whistle, or anything in between.


Quote:

7.5.2 Sit B covers the play in question exactly. The officials screwed up and allowed the wrong team to inbound the ball, so there is nothing that can be done once the throw-in is completed. It would be nice to find some way to mitigate the officials' screw up and go back in time to penalize someone else, but I have yet to see anyone post a rule or case that allows us to go back in time and penalize an act from a previous play. Once the throw-in is completed, the action that warranted the T was a previous play.
7.5.2 B deals with determining the throw-in spot. :confused:


Quote:

Granted, this may be an extreme example, but let's say you called a foul against team A with a couple of seconds left that put team B up 1 after the FT's. As the ball is being inbounded, team A's coach says something to you in Italian right before A1 brings the ball up and launches a shot that goes in at the buzzer. As you count the basket, the scorekeeper (timer?) tells you that the coach just called your mother many nasty names in Italian. Obviously unsporting, but you didn't get it called in time. So you decide to retroactively call the T. Would you wipe out the basket for A, since the action that warranted the T happened before the basket, thus making the entire play a dead ball situation? Since that leaves team B up 1, the game is now over with team B winning?
You're right. That is an extreme example.

Proposed rule: If a technical foul requires a translator, it shall not be called.

rockyroad Wed Jan 12, 2011 05:53pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715072)
Not at all. The point was that a foul (ANY FOUL) that occurs before a shot kills the shot....the rest of the situation is irrelevant. The timing of the whistle doesn't matter....only the timing of the foul. The case play about the throwin is irrelevant...different situation.

Let's change the scenario....wrong team has the ball for a throw in. They throw it into A3. A1 calls you an MF just before A3 shoots the ball. You don't sound the whistle until after the release. Does the shot count or not? THAT is exactly the same as the situation we're talking about.

No it is NOT the same...in the situation we are talking about - way back on page 1, post #6 - the officials did not know they had screwed up until it was too late - by RULE - to correct it.

By your logic - team B throws it in and scores. Team A then scores. Team B scores again. Team A scores again and then calls timeout - at which point you realize it should have been A's ball for the throw-in, B did it purposely, so you wipe out all the points and assess the T because none of those were live balls since the "foul" kept them all from becoming live.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 05:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715106)
No it is NOT the same...in the situation we are talking about - way back on page 1, post #6 - the officials did not know they had screwed up until it was too late - by RULE - to correct it.

By your logic - team B throws it in and scores. Team A then scores. Team B scores again. Team A scores again and then calls timeout - at which point you realize it should have been A's ball for the throw-in, B did it purposely, so you wipe out all the points and assess the T because none of those were live balls since the "foul" kept them all from becoming live.

Absolutely ridiculous.

Right, there has to be a practical limit on just how late this call can be made.

rockyroad Wed Jan 12, 2011 06:01pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715108)
Right, there has to be a practical limit on just how late this call can be made.

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

You want to call the T because you think the Coach had them do it on purpose - fine. I am all for that...but the 3 points stays on the board because that is a result of our screw-up and cannot be fixed once the throw-in ends.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 06:21pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715111)
And that practical limit is stated quite clearly - once the throw-in ends, it is too late.

You want to call the T because you think the Coach had them do it on purpose - fine. I am all for that...but the 3 points stays on the board because that is a result of our screw-up and cannot be fixed once the throw-in ends.

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.

Camron Rust Wed Jan 12, 2011 06:54pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715111)
And that practical limit is stated quite clearly - once the throw-in ends, it is too late.

You want to call the T because you think the Coach had them do it on purpose - fine. I am all for that...but the 3 points stays on the board because that is a result of our screw-up and cannot be fixed once the throw-in ends.

The only thing it is too late to correct is the throw in...that is it. The case play is addressing nothing more than that. The case play doesn't preclude penalizing unsporting fouls. It doesn't consider possible unsportsmanlike behavior. The subsequent shot has NOTHING to do with the throwin error. That shot is a completely independent action and is not tied to other actions that precede it.

The primary objection by Jurrassic and others is that the shot counts because the ball is not dead until you actually make the call. Anyone who asserts that is simply ignoring several rules, cases, and even the rules fundamentals.

IF you choose to call a foul (personal or T) for whatever reason, the ball is dead at the point of the infraction that draws the foul (normal exceptions noted). The rules are absolutely clear on that point...and there are several case plays that back that up.

Calling a foul on an action that occurred before the shot is not correcting the throwin, it is calling a foul.

Jurassic Referee Wed Jan 12, 2011 07:01pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 714845)
You forgot to add that the officials and the players, after the ball was handed to the thrower for the throw-in, were all running around and acting as if the ball was live right up until the basket was made.

I get it.

You're saying that an official can hand the ball to a player for a throw-in. The player then makes a throw-in to a teammate while the official chops time in and the clock starts. That team can then pass the ball for any time period they want to before taking a shot. And after that shot was good, the official can THEN blow his whistle and call a technical foul on that team. And then cancel everything that happened before that, up to and including the throw-in, because the "T" occurred when the thrower was first was out of bounds before the throw-in started even though the technical foul wasn't actually called until umpty-ump seconds or minutes later.

A few questions.....
1) Why would the officials act as if the ball was live right from the start of the throw-in up until the made 3-pointer?
2) After the throw-in was completed and the administering official chopped time in and the clock started, how or do you correct the clock if.... say....the shooting team then took about 6 minutes to shoot?
3) Is there any time limit attached to how much time elapses between the occurence of the foul and blowing the whistle for that occurence?
4) Using that exact same logic, if that wrongly-given throw-in happened in the first quarter, could you still call the "T" in the fourth quarter and cancel everything that happened up to then?
5) Can you call that "T" right up until all officials have left the visual confines of the floor?
5) Did you even bother to read case book play 6.4.1SitD and that interp from 2002-03?

Camron, answers please. Note that post #6 that you responded to stated that there was NO whistle made by any official until AFTER the 3-point shot was made.

Camron Rust Wed Jan 12, 2011 07:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715120)
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.

No, that T is specifically applied when discovered, not when it occurs....because you have no idea WHEN the 6th player entered.

Jurassic Referee Wed Jan 12, 2011 07:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 713849)
The only case play that is close is the one where the scoring team deliberate takes the ball OOB (when it should be the other team's ball) and throws it in. But that is close enough for me. They're going to lose that 3 pointer (it was a dead ball), give up 2 FTs and the ball.

How can this case play...10.1.8....be applicable when it states in the COMMENT-"This procedure shall NOT be used in any other throw-in situation in which a mistake allows the wrong team to inbound the ball."

Camron Rust Wed Jan 12, 2011 07:38pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715149)
How can this case play...10.1.8....be applicable when it states in the COMMENT-"This procedure shall NOT be used in any other throw-in situation in which a mistake allows the wrong team to inbound the ball."

Exactly. The case we're talking about is NOT that exact situation. We're not talking about a mistake but unsportsmanlike behavior. We're not using that procedure at all. We're calling a T for unsportsmanlike behavior and penalizing it according to normal rules.

You keep trying to distort the play to make it fit your argument so you won't be wrong.

Answer ONE question....if you dare. If A2 commits a foul before A3 releases the shot, is the ball dead or not? Once you answer that honestly, the debate is over.

youngump Wed Jan 12, 2011 07:44pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715175)
Exactly. The case we're talking about is NOT that exact situation. We're not talking about a mistake but unsportsmanlike behavior. We're not using that procedure at all. We're calling a T for unsportsmanlike behavior and penalizing it according to normal rules.

You keep trying to distort the play to make it fit your argument so you won't be wrong.

Answer ONE question....if you dare. If A2 commits a foul before A3 releases the shot, is the ball dead or not? Once you answer that honestly, the debate is over.

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?
________
Cannabis seeds

Camron Rust Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715177)
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?

Why do people insist on being silly. No one ever goes back and makes a call for something that happened several plays ago.

The premise for the discussion is that the action is worthy of a technical foul (whether it is or not is a different debate). The events are back-to-back and the it takes a moment for the official to process the sequence of events and decide what just happened and whether they're going to do anything about it. We're talking about a time frame of a few seconds here, not several passes later.

How many people see a bump or some other contact and have a whistle exactly in time with the contact? How many people hear a T-worthy profanity and have a whistle exactly in time with the words coming out of the offender's mouth? No one. Anyone that makes any argument about the timing of the whistle for a foul (even a T) relative to the release is in fairyland.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715175)
Exactly. The case we're talking about is NOT that exact situation. We're not talking about a mistake but unsportsmanlike behavior. We're not using that procedure at all. We're calling a T for unsportsmanlike behavior and penalizing it according to normal rules.

You keep trying to distort the play to make it fit your argument so you won't be wrong.

Answer ONE question....if you dare. If A2 commits a foul before A3 releases the shot, is the ball dead or not? Once you answer that honestly, the debate is over.

But you're the one using this case play for inspiration on this call, right?

Camron Rust Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:19pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715189)
But you're the one using this case play for inspiration on this call, right?


I don't think I ever cited that play as my inspiration.

My inspiration is that the play was deliberate and not within the spirit of the game. As such, it should be a T. Then, everything else is based on 6-7-* and related cases as to when the ball is dead.

Jurassic Referee Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:20pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715175)
1)You keep trying to distort the play to make it fit your argument so you won't be wrong.

2) Answer ONE question....if you dare. If A2 commits a foul before A3 releases the shot, is the ball dead or not? Once you answer that honestly, the debate is over.

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?

2) Yes the ball is dead in that situation at once by rule. And I have never said anything to the contrary. Well, except if someone tries to tell me that there were 3 passes and a shot from the time the foul occured and the whistle was blown. That would be kinda ridiculous, wouldn't it? But can you point me to where in post #6 anything like that actually happened? Was there ever a whistle blown for the technical foul that you so desperately want to call on the team that wrongfully took the throw-in? You keep saying the 3-point basket can't be counted because the ball became dead but when did the ball actually become dead? According to post #6, the only whistle that was blown was when the other coach was given a "T" AFTER the 3-pointer was made. You keep trying to distort the actual play described in post #6 to make it fit your argument so you won't be wrong.

just another ref Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:37pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715194)
According to post #6, the only whistle that was blown was when the other coach was given a "T" AFTER the 3-pointer was made. You keep trying to distort the actual play described in post #6 to make it fit your argument so you won't be wrong.


I missed the part that it was the other coach that got the T that stopped play.
I'm changing my vote to: The shot counts because it's now too late to call the T the perceived act of deception. If they did it, they shouldn't have done it, but they got away with it.

Jurassic Referee Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:38pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715186)
Why do people insist on being silly. No one ever goes back and makes a call for something that happened several plays ago.

The premise for the discussion is that the action is worthy of a technical foul (whether it is or not is a different debate). The events are back-to-back and the it takes a moment for the official to process the sequence of events and decide what just happened and whether they're going to do anything about it. We're talking about a time frame of a few seconds here, not several passes later.

How many people see a bump or some other contact and have a whistle exactly in time with the contact? How many people hear a T-worthy profanity and have a whistle exactly in time with the words coming out of the offender's mouth? No one. Anyone that makes any argument about the timing of the whistle for a foul (even a T) relative to the release is in fairyland.

Then when did the technical foul occur in post #6? I can't find one ever being called on the team that wrongfully took the throw-in. You keep insisting the ball was dead in post #6 before the shot but what made it dead?

You made up a completely different situation than the one that was described in post #6 and you're answering questions as per your situation, not the one described in post #6.

I have no problem with someone saying they could have called a unsporting technical foul on the team who wrongfully took the throw-in. All unsporting "T"s are a judgment call, and even if I disagree with your decision to call one in that situation that doesn't mean that the rules don't justify that call. And I don't have a problem with someone saying they called that unsporting "T" just before the 3-point shot was in the air but they didn't put air into their whistle until the shot was gone. But please don't blow smoke up my azz and try and tell me that you or anyone else can call a "T" on a team before one of their players shot, and then you can wait until the shot went in and there was a subsequent argument with a coach before you decided to blow the whistle for your unsporting "T" from before the shot. That's hardly believable.

Camron Rust Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:45pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715194)
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?

2) Yes the ball is dead in that situation at once by rule. And I have never said anything to the contrary. Well, except if someone tries to tell me that there were 3 passes and a shot from the time the foul occured and the whistle was blown. That would be kinda ridiculous, wouldn't it? But can you point me to where in post #6 anything like that actually happened? Was there ever a whistle blown for the technical foul that you so desperately want to call on the team that wrongfully took the throw-in? You keep saying the 3-point basket can't be counted because the ball became dead but when did the ball actually become dead? According to post #6, the only whistle that was blown was when the other coach was given a "T" AFTER the 3-pointer was made. You keep trying to distort the actual play described in post #6 to make it fit your argument so you won't be wrong.

Post #6: "Offical gives player the ball and he throws it in and his teammate makes an uncontested 3. As soon as the V team completed the throw-in V coach is in officials ear telling him it is not correctable"

That statement by the coach, which is what I'm basing the T on, is after the ball is inbounds and before the shot is released.

I was not addressing anything in post 6 after the the initial events (the throw-in, statement by coach V, and shot). I stated that, at that very point, we'd have a T on team V. Perhaps that wasn't clear. What the H coach did to earn the T after that point a completely different issue.

Whether it is T'able or not is not the question, that is the assumption I injected. What is not being suggested is what could be done once coach H was complaining and got the T....way too late then. The point we're debating is whistle vs. infraction vs. release as it applies to counting the shot...implying they (decision/whistle/shot) are fairly close together...and that order doesn't matter, only the order of the infraction vs. shot.

You've just agreed that, regarding a foul committed before by team A before the release, "the ball is dead in that situation at once by rule".

Unless you're changing your story, your contradicting yourself now. You previously said that
"If you haven't decided to call the "T" or had not blown your whistle before the ball left the shooter's hands on the 3-point attempt, you have no rules justication that I know of to then cancel the 3-point basket if it goes. The ball is live until the try is made or missed."
In one, you agree that the foul makes the ball dead by rule where, in the other, you said that if you hadn't blown whistle before the release, the shot had to count.

Adam Wed Jan 12, 2011 08:46pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715193)
I don't think I ever cited that play.

Post 9.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 713849)
Which "him" got the T? The V coach or the H coach?

Even it is not correctable, it is T'able. The fact that the coach said something the moment it was inbounds indicates they did it on purpose. That is an unsporting T.

The only case play that is close is the one where the scoring team deliberate takes the ball OOB (when it should be the other team's ball) and throws it in. But that is close enough for me. They're going to lose that 3 pointer (it was a dead ball), give up 2 FTs and the ball.

The H coach had every right to be pissed. The officials gave the other team the ball incorrectly at the end of the game when likely had a big impact. I'd give him a very long leash on that one.

Here you're quoting it and saying it's close enough for you, in spite of the fact that the case play itself says it only applies to the exact situation presented.

Jurassic Referee Wed Jan 12, 2011 09:15pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715201)
Post #6: "Offical gives player the ball and he throws it in and his teammate makes an uncontested 3. As soon as the V team completed the throw-in V coach is in officials ear telling him it is not correctable"

That statement by the coach, which is what I'm basing the T on, is after the ball is inbounds and before the shot is released.

I was not addressing anything in post 6 after the the initial events (the throw-in, statement by coach V, and shot). I stated that, at that very point, we'd have a T on team V. Perhaps that wasn't clear. What the H coach did to earn the T after that point a completely different issue.

Whether it is T'able or not is not the question, that is the assumption I injected.

Yup, and the <font color = red>assumption</font> that you injected is NOT what we've been discussing. It's a completely different situation with a completely different answer than post #6. In post #6, there was NO technical foul called until after the 3-pointer was made, and then that "T" was called on the opposing coach.

And I'm going around and around repeating that. Time for me to say Hasta La Vista.

rockyroad Thu Jan 13, 2011 12:34am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715208)

And I'm going around and around repeating that. Time for me to say Hasta La Vista.

Me, too...this is ridiculous. He doesn't get it and never will. (shrug)

Cobra Thu Jan 13, 2011 01:01am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715194)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 01:11am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715252)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 01:29am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715120)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by M&M Guy (Post 714998)
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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715177)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715111)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715042)
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.


Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715253)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 01:38am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715256)



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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 01:50am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715252)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 02:09am

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715257)
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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715257)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 02:33am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715265)

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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 02:36am

Quote:

Originally Posted by just another ref (Post 715270)
Starting the clock after a throw-in

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

Camron Rust Thu Jan 13, 2011 03:56am

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimTaylor (Post 715261)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 07:42am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715281)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 07:59am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 714786)
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.

<font color = red>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.</font>

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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 09:46am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715252)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 10:33am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715256)







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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 01:30pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715327)
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 Thu Jan 13, 2011 01:43pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715281)
.......
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......

Cobra Thu Jan 13, 2011 03:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715334)
Cobra, right there is all that I need to know about you and your rules knowledge.

I wouldn't be talking if I were you. Earlier you said the ball becomes dead on the whistle when a foul is called. Even if I'm wrong on this, at least it is a complicated situation. You don't even know the fundamentals.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715334)
According to you, the foul occured when the wrong thrower stepped out of bounds.

I never said that, that is just the situation being discussed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715334)
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.

No technical foul was called at all in post #6. We are talking about a different situation. You keep talking about the whistle. When the whistle occurred means nothing. The foul could be called without a whistle.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715334)
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?

Hold on....you are mixing the two situations together. You need to stop picking and choosing which situation you talking about depending on which one makes you slightly look less stupid.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715358)
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.

Nope. JR was discussing the wrinkle in several posts. He said some stupid things then tried to cover it up by saying he was talking about #6.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715364)
Do you even realize the fact that you are contradicting yourself???

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

Good grief.

No I'm not. There is no time limit to go back and call a foul. But at some point it just becomes too long even though the rules still allow the foul to be called. Same thing with violations. No one is going to go back and call traveling from 5 minutes ago even though the rules allow it to be done.

Camron Rust Thu Jan 13, 2011 03:17pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimTaylor (Post 715420)
My concerns with this specific situation are:

You have to be 100% certain it was a deliberate subversion of fair play. The NFHS has made it clear that there are certain types of actions that are just not part of basketball and should not be permitted. For example, the barking dog distraction, on its own, is not obviously against any rule that I can find...but they want it whistled as a T. There are other examples. I view a purposeful attempt to cheat like this in the same vein....it doesn't belong in the game and should be addressed whether there is a specific rule against it or not. But again, you better be 100% sure.

Jurassic Referee Thu Jan 13, 2011 03:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715452)
When the whistle occurred means nothing. The foul could be called without a whistle.

There is no time limit to go back and call a foul. But at some point it just becomes too long even though the rules still allow the foul to be called. Same thing with violations. No one is going to go back and call traveling from 5 minutes ago even though the rules allow it to be done.

That just about says it all...... again.

You can call a foul without a whistle and there's no time limit to go back and call that foul.

And the rules allow us to go back and call traveling from 5 minutes ago.

Do the rules also allow us to go back and call a foul or violation from last week?

You really aren't an official, are you?

BillyMac Thu Jan 13, 2011 03:32pm

Don't Poke The Bear ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715452)
I wouldn't be talking if I were you. You don't even know the fundamentals. Makes you slightly look less stupid.

Cobra: After 150 posts I'm sure that you don't know who you're dealing with here. Gruff. Yes. Impatient? Yes. Condescending? Yes. Sarcastic? Yes. Handsome? Yes

"Don't even know the fundamentals"? Wrong. There are only four, or five, regular posters on the Forum that that have the basketball officiating knowledge that Jurassic Referee has. He's gonna be right 98% of the time.

Now I suggest that you don't make eye contact, and just back away slowly. Very slowly. He may spare your life.

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:oseitFkBZmo-GM:

just another ref Thu Jan 13, 2011 03:58pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 715462)

He's gonna be right 98% of the time.

Agreed. But them other 2% can be a real, uh, bear. Yeah, that's the word.

TimTaylor Thu Jan 13, 2011 03:58pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715453)
You have to be 100% certain it was a deliberate subversion of fair play........

I agree completely with this. From what was posted, IMHO, there isn't enough information to be 100% sure it was deliberate - there are other plausible explanations, and good reasons why any coach with half a brain that deliberately planned something like this would not make a statement like that which draws attention to it.

And it still doesn't address the fact that if the officials were doing their job in the first place it would never have happened anyway regardless of their intent.

Cobra Thu Jan 13, 2011 04:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715460)
That just about says it all...... again.

You can call a foul without a whistle and there's no time limit to go back and call that foul.

And the rules allow us to go back and call traveling from 5 minutes ago.

Do the rules also allow us to go back and call a foul or violation from last week?

You really aren't an official, are you?

Can someone please post the rules which state...

1) What the time limit to call a foul is after it occurs.
2) What the time limit to call a violation is after it occurs.
3) That a sounding the whistle is required for calling a foul.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 715462)
Cobra: After 150 posts I'm sure that you don't know who you're dealing with here. Gruff. Yes. Impatient? Yes. Condescending? Yes. Sarcastic? Yes. Handsome? Yes

"Don't even know the fundamentals"? Wrong. There are only four, or five, regular posters on the Forum that that have the basketball officiating knowledge that Jurassic Referee has. He's gonna be right 98% of the time.

Now I suggest that you don't make eye contact, and just back away slowly. Very slowly. He may spare your life.

Ok, thanks. But you must have missed it where he told us at what point the ball becomes dead when a foul is involved.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 714165)
The ball was dead on the whistle for the "T".


rockyroad Thu Jan 13, 2011 04:18pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715452)

No I'm not.
There is no time limit to go back and call a foul.
But at some point it just becomes too long

But you aren't contradicting yourself at all, are you?

So how do you - in your infinite wisdom and knowledge of the rules and how to apply them - decide when it has "become too long?"

Is it the same amount of time each game? Or does it change from Monday night's Girls Varsity to Tuesday night's Boys JV to Wednesday night's NAIA game?

What criteria do you use to decide when it has been too long?

And how many points are you willing to take off the board?

Have you followed - the last few years - the situations in NCAA games where officials allowed "do-overs"?

Camron Rust Thu Jan 13, 2011 04:30pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715491)
So how do you - in your infinite wisdom and knowledge of the rules and how to apply them - decide when it has "become too long?"

We all know that there is no specific rule-based time limit on calling most violations or fouls. But there is a point where it is just too late and that is part of the art of officiating.

The primary point which I'm trying to get across is that when several events happen close together, you don't have to beat the 2nd event with your whistle to penalize the first event. Why Jurassic was insisting that was the case and why that has been so difficult for others to accept, I have yet to figure out.

Raymond Thu Jan 13, 2011 04:48pm

I thought I posted this somewhere earlier but I can't find so I'll ask again:

A1 steals B1's dribble and has a breakaway lay-up. While A1 is crossing the 3-point line Coach B says to you loudly "That was f**king horrible". You do not blow your whistle. A1 finishes his drive to the basket and makes a lay-up.

What is the proper administration of this play?

Mark Padgett Thu Jan 13, 2011 04:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 715508)
I thought I posted this somewhere earlier but I can't find so I'll ask again:

A1 steals B1's dribble and has a breakaway lay-up. While A1 is crossing the 3-point line Coach B says to you loudly "That was f**king horrible". You do not blow your whistle. A1 finishes his drive to the basket and makes a lay-up.

What is the proper administration of this play?

You then blow your whistle, issue the flagrant technical to Coach B, toss his butt out of the gym, administer the T and spend the rest of the game feeling good.

Raymond Thu Jan 13, 2011 04:52pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 715508)
I thought I posted this somewhere earlier but I can't find so I'll ask again:

A1 steals B1's dribble and has a breakaway lay-up. While A1 is crossing the 3-point line Coach B says to you loudly "That was f**king horrible". You do not blow your whistle. A1 finishes his drive to the basket and makes a lay-up.

What is the proper administration of this play?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 715509)
You then blow your whistle, issue the flagrant technical to Coach B, toss his butt out of the gym, administer the T and spend the rest of the game feeling good.

And wipe out the basket since his flagrant act made the ball dead? :D

Camron Rust Thu Jan 13, 2011 04:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 715510)
And wipe out the basket since his flagrant act made the ball dead? :D

Of course not. I said it before...there is a SPECIFIC case play that instructs us to wait until after the basket and then call the T. But that is a very specific case to prevent a coach/player form gaining an unfair advantage. The case leads you to the "right" result even if it actually contradicts the rules.

Raymond Thu Jan 13, 2011 05:10pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 715510)
And wipe out the basket since his flagrant act made the ball dead? :D

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 715512)
Of course not. I said it before...there is a SPECIFIC case play that instructs us to wait until after the basket and then call the T. But that is a very specific case to prevent a coach/player form gaining an unfair advantage. The case leads you to the "right" result even if it actually contradicts the rules.


Well, isn't there a very specific case play involving the wrong team throwing in the ball and then scoring? It seems like folks are deciding to expand that very specific case play to a similar, but not the same, situation. The very specific case play involving the throw-in states specifically in which situation we can wipe out the points.

RookieDude Thu Jan 13, 2011 05:39pm

Cobra...I appreciate your enthusiasm.

What I do not appreciate is your disrespect for a guy that has helped more people on this forum than you can imagine.

You may be a big dog where you are from...but, JR is the big dog here.
Give him some respect, even if you don't agree with him, you will gain more respect that way.

(Do you see Camron, another big dog, giving him a lack of respect...even when he disagrees with him?)

There is a way to debate things...and then there is a way of getting into a pi$$ing match. You will get the respect you deserve here when you learn that...IMHO.

Adam Thu Jan 13, 2011 06:34pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715452)
No technical foul was called at all in post #6. We are talking about a different situation. You keep talking about the whistle. When the whistle occurred means nothing. The foul could be called without a whistle.

Did you even read post #6?

And really? How do you propose to call a foul without a whistle in this situation?
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715452)
Nope. JR was discussing the wrinkle in several posts. He said some stupid things then tried to cover it up by saying he was talking about #6.

Here you're just wrong. He absolutely was discussing post #6 the entire time; even if others (including me) didn't quite realize it. As I said, you guys were arguing past each other.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715452)

No I'm not. There is no time limit to go back and call a foul. But at some point it just becomes too long even though the rules still allow the foul to be called. Same thing with violations. No one is going to go back and call traveling from 5 minutes ago even though the rules allow it to be done.

2-10 lists the errors that may be corrected and the time frame in which such correction must be made. No where is a travel listed in that, so I'd say the rules in fact do not allow you to go back and call a travel from several plays before.

Cobra Thu Jan 13, 2011 07:00pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715558)
And really? How do you propose to call a foul without a whistle in this situation?

The same way as in any other situation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715558)
Here you're just wrong. He absolutely was discussing post #6 the entire time; even if others (including me) didn't quite realize it. As I said, you guys were arguing past each other.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Here he is directly quoting the situation in which the technical foul is called on the thrower and he said the ball is "dead on the whistle."

http://forum.officiating.com/714165-post24.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715558)
2-10 lists the errors that may be corrected and the time frame in which such correction must be made. No where is a travel listed in that, so I'd say the rules in fact do not allow you to go back and call a travel from several plays before.

That has nothing to do with this play. There was no error. The official just took longer than normal to call the violation after it occurred.

Adam Thu Jan 13, 2011 07:10pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715573)
The same way as in any other situation.

I've never called a foul during action without a whistle, so you'll have to enlighten me.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715573)
Sorry, but you are wrong. Here he is directly quoting the situation in which the technical foul is called on the thrower and he said the ball is "dead on the whistle."

http://forum.officiating.com/714165-post24.html

Yeah, he said it was dead on the whistle, which I take (knowing how well he knows the rules) as a mis-speak rather than an error in rules knowledge. But reading it with the understanding that he was talking about the TF mentioned in post #6, it's all the more clear. He was assuming the TF that was being discussed was (a) after the basket and (b) on the team who had just been screwed by the officials' inability to pay attention.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715573)
That has nothing to do with this play. There was no error. The official just took longer than normal to call the violation after it occurred.

It's the only place that talks about the ability to fix a mistake, and that's exactly what a missed travel call is. I wouldn't say the rules allow for fixing that error; even though the precise limit on "when is too late" isn't really specified.

I'm obviously giving Jurassic more benefit of the doubt than you are; but he's earned it on this board quite frankly.

youngump Thu Jan 13, 2011 07:16pm

Redux
 
So I posit that everybody has become confused about who is talking about what.

Let me see if I can resolve this.

Cobra is saying that he can go back and call a foul from the start of the first half if he realizes it was a foul with 5 seconds left in the game. If so all subsequent action happened during a dead ball since the foul made the ball dead. No one agrees with him.

JR is saying that if the ball is erroneously inbounded then it has become live. Only Cobra disagrees on this point.

Camron is saying that if right after the ball is inbounded the V coach says something to merit a technical and he decides to call it that the ball is dead when the coach says it even if he drops his whistle and makes the call a second or two later. The foul made the ball dead and the whistle was just making it official. It's not clear to me if JR agrees or not.

He further envisions that in some early numbered post this is what was happening here. JR disagrees that the early numbered post describes that situation.

JR is saying that if the three is shot and then the official decides to call a technical that the ball was not dead when shot and the three counts. It's not clear to me if Camron agrees or not.

Does this capture everyone's viewpoint or is there more?
________
Vapir no2 vaporizer

rockyroad Thu Jan 13, 2011 07:41pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715582)
So I posit that everybody has become confused about who is talking about what.

Let me see if I can resolve this.

Cobra is saying that he can go back and call a foul from the start of the first half if he realizes it was a foul with 5 seconds left in the game. If so all subsequent action happened during a dead ball since the foul made the ball dead. No one agrees with him.

JR is saying that if the ball is erroneously inbounded then it has become live. Only Cobra disagrees on this point.

Camron is saying that if right after the ball is inbounded the V coach says something to merit a technical and he decides to call it that the ball is dead when the coach says it even if he drops his whistle and makes the call a second or two later. The foul made the ball dead and the whistle was just making it official. It's not clear to me if JR agrees or not.

He further envisions that in some early numbered post this is what was happening here. JR disagrees that the early numbered post describes that situation.

JR is saying that if the three is shot and then the official decides to call a technical that the ball was not dead when shot and the three counts. It's not clear to me if Camron agrees or not.

Does this capture everyone's viewpoint or is there more?

Pretty good summary! The only change would be that JR is saying that if the 3 point shot is MADE and THEN the official decides to call the T, you don't take the 3 points off the board.

Adam Thu Jan 13, 2011 07:54pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockyroad (Post 715585)
pretty good summary! The only change would be that jr is saying that if the 3 point shot is made and then the official decides to call the t, you don't take the 3 points off the board.

+1

Judtech Thu Jan 13, 2011 08:22pm

SNAQ I have called MANY fouls with out a whistle. However, it was in my capacity as an assistant coach (Yell: "Hold Up. White/Blue out.) a player in a pick up game (You got it if you want it) or as a fan (WOW, there should have been a foul there)
So as you can see, it IS possible to call a foul without a whistle!!:D

Adam Thu Jan 13, 2011 08:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judtech (Post 715590)
SNAQ I have called MANY fouls with out a whistle. However, it was in my capacity as an assistant coach (Yell: "Hold Up. White/Blue out.) a player in a pick up game (You got it if you want it) or as a fan (WOW, there should have been a foul there)
So as you can see, it IS possible to call a foul without a whistle!!:D

Like the calls I make from my living room? Now I understand.

Jurassic Referee Thu Jan 13, 2011 08:57pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715580)
1) Yeah, he said it was dead on the whistle, which I take (knowing how well he knows the rules) as a mis-speak rather than an error in rules knowledge. But reading it with the understanding that he was talking about the TF mentioned in post #6, it's all the more clear. He was assuming the TF that was being discussed was (a) after the basket and (b) on the team who had just been screwed by the officials' inability to pay attention.

2) It's the only place that talks about the ability to fix a mistake, and that's exactly what a missed travel call is. I wouldn't say the rules allow for fixing that error; even though the precise limit on "when is too late" isn't really specified.

1) Yes, I was assuming that because that was the only whistle that was ever blown in post #6. I can't seriously consider as being logical that you can have a technical foul occur right after a throw-in, a team then goes up court and takes a 3-pointer and makes it, and after the made 3-pointer there's an argument resulting in a whistle for a technical foul..... and there's still hasn't been a whistle ever been blown for the original technical foul that occurred right after the throw-in ended. But we're supposed to think the ball was dead through all that. Maybe it's just me, but I just can't buy the logic on that one.

2) There's no precise time limit set between a foul or violation occuring and the whistle for that foul or violation but there is common sense plus an understanding of what is usually expected from us as officials. A patient whistle is good sometimes..... not all the time..... but if you see a foul or violation occur and you don't blow your whistle for that foul or violation within about 2 or 3 seconds max, you might as well let it go because the play is now usually long gone. Hell, the play might be half the court away in that 2 or 3 seconds. And if you want to wait for...gasp...more than 5 seconds to blow your whistle after a foul or violation occured, well, all I can say is good luck to in your new job as one of chseagle's assistants. There's real life out there. And that is why I can't really take any of Cobra's arguments seriously.

Jmo fwiw....

26 Year Gap Thu Jan 13, 2011 09:05pm

I'm on board with post #7

Cobra Thu Jan 13, 2011 09:08pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715580)
I've never called a foul during action without a whistle, so you'll have to enlighten me.

Just yell for them to stop or something. The point is that sounding the whistle is not required by rule in order to call a foul.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells (Post 715580)
Yeah, he said it was dead on the whistle, which I take (knowing how well he knows the rules) as a mis-speak rather than an error in rules knowledge.

Yes, that makes sense. But it was not a single incident. It is possible to have something come out wrong in a post. But when it is happening multiple times then it is more of a rules knowledge problem than a rules explaining problem.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 714256)
If you haven't decided to call the "T" or had not blown your whistle before the ball left the shooter's hands on the 3-point attempt, you have no rules justication that I know of to then cancel the 3-point basket if it goes. The ball is live until the try is made or missed.

When an official decides to call a foul or sounds the whistle has no bearing on when the ball becomes dead. The ball becomes dead when the foul occurs.


Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715582)
Cobra is saying that he can go back and call a foul from the start of the first half if he realizes it was a foul with 5 seconds left in the game. If so all subsequent action happened during a dead ball since the foul made the ball dead. No one agrees with him.

All I have said is that there is time limit under the rules for calling fouls and violations. Other people agree with this. Other people disagree but have not provided a rules citation.


Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715582)
JR is saying that if the ball is erroneously inbounded then it has become live. Only Cobra disagrees on this point.

The ball would become live when it is at the disposal of the thrower, not when inbounded. But if there a foul before it is at his disposal then the ball would remain dead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715582)
He further envisions that in some early numbered post this is what was happening here. JR disagrees that the early numbered post describes that situation.

Cameron came up with his own situation which involved a technical foul being called on the thrower.

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715582)
JR is saying that if the three is shot and then the official decides to call a technical that the ball was not dead when shot and the three counts. It's not clear to me if Camron agrees or not.

Cameron does not agree with that. The ball becomes or remains dead when the foul occurs. The fact that it took the official a couple of seconds to call it does not change anything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715602)
2) There's no precise time limit set between a foul or violation occuring and the whistle for that foul or violation but there is common sense plus an understanding of what is usually expected from us as officials. A patient whistle is good sometimes..... not all the time..... but if you see a foul or violation occur and you don't blow your whistle for that foul or violation within about 2 or 3 seconds max, you might as well let it go because the play is now usually long gone. Hell, the play might be half the court away in that 2 or 3 seconds. And if you want to wait for...gasp...more than 5 seconds to blow your whistle after a foul or violation occured, well, all I can say is good luck to in your new job as one of chseagle's assistants. There's real life out there. And that is why I can't really take any of Cobra's arguments seriously.

I never said that officials should be going back and calling fouls which occurred earlier. All I said is that there are no rules against doing so.

Adam Thu Jan 13, 2011 09:25pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715606)
Yes, that makes sense. But it was not a single incident. It is possible to have something come out wrong in a post. But when it is happening multiple times then it is more of a rules knowledge problem than a rules explaining problem.

If you want to go on thinking JR doesn't know the fundamentals based on a misunderstanding of which play was being discussed, go ahead and make that mistake. I really don't care. I personally wouldn't hang my hat on that, but you're free to.

If you want to think he's an a$$ for the way he's discussed this with you, go ahead. You won't be alone, and he won't really care.

Jurassic Referee Thu Jan 13, 2011 09:59pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 714786)
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. <font color = red>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.</font>

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.

Grin.

You just can't make something like this up, folks. :D

And I ain't gonna argue with him either.

Raymond Thu Jan 13, 2011 11:12pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715619)
Grin.

You just can't make something like this up, folks. :D

And I ain't gonna argue with him either.

I'm just wondering why Cobra won't address the correlation between the original argument and the play I put out there about a Tech on the defense's coach during a fast break.

Adam Fri Jan 14, 2011 01:22am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 715634)
I'm just wondering why Cobra won't address the correlation between the original argument and the play I put out there about a Tech on the defense's coach during a fast break.

I have to agree with his take, if you call a T on the offense for something they did right before the shooter releases his shot. The shot doesn't count, even if your whistle doesn't sound until the shot is in the air. Same as if A2 is called for an TC foul just prior to the shot.

As Camron noted, the case play is clear on what to do if the defensive coach (or player) pops off here. When I thought JR was discussing Camron's T on team B, I asked this very same question.

Cobra Fri Jan 14, 2011 02:04am

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 715634)
I'm just wondering why Cobra won't address the correlation between the original argument and the play I put out there about a Tech on the defense's coach during a fast break.

Because it has already been addressed by other posters. There are a couple situations where things which are normally fouls or violations but do not cause the ball to become dead. This play is one. Another the same type of play with someone on the defense running out of bounds to get a violation called. Defensive player sticking his arm though the throw in plane while the clock is running with the hopes of getting the violation called so the clock would stop.

There is no correlation between any of those plays and the play which is being discussed. Those are specific exemptions to when the ball becomes dead. I don't know why you don't understand that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee (Post 715619)
Grin.

You just can't make something like this up, folks. :D

And I ain't gonna argue with him either.

Unless you are directly quoting the rule book on when a ball becomes dead.

If I am so wrong can you please explain and cite rules to when the ball becomes dead in that situation?

If you aren't going to argue with me why are you quoting a post I made quite some time ago....a post that you already quoted and replied to? Seems like you want to argue.

Camron Rust Fri Jan 14, 2011 03:02am

Quote:

Originally Posted by youngump (Post 715582)
So I posit that everybody has become confused about who is talking about what.

Let me see if I can resolve this.

Cobra is saying that he can go back and call a foul from the start of the first half if he realizes it was a foul with 5 seconds left in the game. If so all subsequent action happened during a dead ball since the foul made the ball dead. No one agrees with him.

JR is saying that if the ball is erroneously inbounded then it has become live. Only Cobra disagrees on this point.

Camron is saying that if right after the ball is inbounded the V coach says something to merit a technical and he decides to call it that the ball is dead when the coach says it even if he drops his whistle and makes the call a second or two later. The foul made the ball dead and the whistle was just making it official. It's not clear to me if JR agrees or not.

He further envisions that in some early numbered post this is what was happening here. JR disagrees that the early numbered post describes that situation.

JR is saying that if the three is shot and then the official decides to call a technical that the ball was not dead when shot and the three counts. It's not clear to me if Camron agrees or not.

Does this capture everyone's viewpoint or is there more?

That is spot on....and what I was TRYING to say...but apparently so very poorly.


I'm not even sure JR is saying that.

If the official takes a 1, 2, maybe 3 seconds to process an unusual situation and finally decides, after the shot was released, to call the T for the act that was just before the shot, I assert that the shot was dead. Being momentarily frozen due to a bizarre situation doesn't mean that the time of occurrence is changed....the ball would be dead by rule.

I think JR is saying that if you've moved on, haven't called the T, go down to the other end of the court, you can't even go back and decide to call the T or wipe the shot.....with that I agree.


Can we just delete 90% of this thread now that we've all realized we were talking about a different set of assumptions?

asdf Fri Jan 14, 2011 07:01am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715606)
Just yell for them to stop or something. The point is that sounding the whistle is not required by rule in order to call a foul.

I don't need to go to #6 to see who's right or wrong after reading this. This is without a doubt, the dumbest thing I have ever read on here.

From Page 33 of the 2009-2011 NFHS Basketball Officials Manual

2.4.2 FOULS

B. Point of the Foul: It is imperative that a definite procedure in officiating mechanics be used when a foul occurs. The following duties should be performed in the order listed by the calling official:

1. Inform the timer and alert the scorer by sounding the whistle with a single sharp blast while raising one hand, fist clenched, straight and high above the head.

Jurassic Referee Fri Jan 14, 2011 07:16am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 71567)
1If the official takes a 1, 2, maybe 3 seconds to process an unusual situation and finally decides, after the shot was released, to call the T for the act that was just before the shot, I assert that the shot was dead. Being momentarily frozen due to a bizarre situation doesn't mean that the time of occurrence is changed....the ball would be dead by rule.

I think JR is saying that if you've moved on, haven't called the T, go down to the other end of the court, you can't even go back and decide to call the T or wipe the shot.....with that I agree.

Can we just delete 90% of this thread now that we've all realized we were talking about a different set of assumptions?

I agree. Aamof I think that I have already agreed with what Camron is saying above way back in my posts #32 and 38 of this thread.

I also agree that it's time to move on. We're beating a dead horse. I'm sureasheck not going to argue with Cobra any more about the ball being dead for a technical foul committed before the throw-in even though a whistle wasn't blown for that "T" until after a completed throw-in, a completed play and a made 3-point basket. Which would also mean that the throw-in and everything that happened after it never happened. That's just too bizarre for me. Then again though, that's just me.

Raymond Fri Jan 14, 2011 08:43am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cobra (Post 715662)
Because it has already been addressed by other posters. There are a couple situations where things which are normally fouls or violations but do not cause the ball to become dead. This play is one. Another the same type of play with someone on the defense running out of bounds to get a violation called. Defensive player sticking his arm though the throw in plane while the clock is running with the hopes of getting the violation called so the clock would stop.

There is no correlation between any of those plays and the play which is being discussed. Those are specific exemptions to when the ball becomes dead. I don't know why you don't understand that.
....

There is also a specific exemption for when you can wipe out points that were scored after a botched throw-in. The specific play being discussed doesn't meet that exemption. Your desired administration of the play is only valid when you start making up your own variables to change what actually occurred.

just another ref Sat Jan 15, 2011 01:08am

Well, it happened to me tonight.....sorta. White deflects the pass out of bounds. Blue ball. Game is a BIG blowout, so it's fair to say we had all relaxed.
White 21 steps out of bounds. I hand him the ball. White 10 breaks to his basket, all alone. 21 lays the pass out in front of him, and I hit the whistle while the ball is in the air. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. I give the ball back to blue without incident. Two things occur to me. I find it even harder to imagine giving a T in this situation for perceived deception. It took cooperation from both the blue team and me to pull off the trick. Even if I'm positive it was intentional, I would truly hate to call further attention to my own screw up.
Second, I think this is a prime candidate for a rule change. Let this be correctable until there is a change of possession.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1