Possesion Arrow Error

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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]

Originally Posted by youngump

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

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

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.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I don't think I ever cited that play.

Post 9.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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

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.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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 assumption 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]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

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

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

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Cobra

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

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

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Cobra

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

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