![]() |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
dunk, or attempt to dunk, a dead ball. |
Quote:
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? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Cobra - I would love to read your thoughts on my post #105.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
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. 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? |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Proposed rule: If a technical foul requires a translator, it shall not be called. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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 |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
And I'm going around and around repeating that. Time for me to say Hasta La Vista. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Some of us thought we were. And at least one of us misread it, which changes everything as far as I'm concerned. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
That is way too long - BUT there is no time limit. Good grief. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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...... |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
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? |
Don't Poke The Bear ...
Quote:
"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: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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:
Quote:
|
Quote:
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"? |
Quote:
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. |
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:
|
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
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. |
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. |
Quote:
And really? How do you propose to call a foul without a whistle in this situation? Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
http://forum.officiating.com/714165-post24.html Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'm obviously giving Jurassic more benefit of the doubt than you are; but he's earned it on this board quite frankly. |
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 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
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 |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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.... |
I'm on board with post #7
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
You just can't make something like this up, folks. :D And I ain't gonna argue with him either. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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:
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. |
Quote:
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? |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
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. |
Quote:
|
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. |