AAARRRRGGG!!

[Ref in PA]

This is a long post - sorry, but I need to vent.

Last night was our first chapter meeting for the up-coming year. Our rules interpreter went through the rule changes for this year with some overhead slides and covered some points of emphasis (nfhs).

The situation came up of A1 dunking the ball, ball is through the hoop, and A1 crashing into B1 (who has legal guarding position) before A1 returns to the floor. Everyone was okay with calling a player control foul on A1 and not scoring the basket, even though the contact was after the ball had gone through the hoop. Further discussion ensued about what the call would be if A1 returned to the floor and then crashed into B1. The quick consensus was just a common foul on A1. I raised my hand at this point and say "the ball is dead, dead ball fouls are technical fouls." The interpreter says the ball is not dead. I say "according to the rule book, the ball is dead after a made basket until the ref deems the ball is available to the other team for a throw-in." Interpreter asks me "Is the clock running?" I say yes. Interpreter says if the clock is still running, the ball is not dead. I feel alone at this point. All the other refs are looking like deer in the middle of the road blinded by headlights. I then ask, (it's my only way out) "Is this how we should interpret the situation?" He says yes. After the meeting, I explain that I am looking for how to interpret the rules, not trying to be a smartaleck. But I further ask "What about correctable errors? The rulebook says we have until the first dead ball to correct a correctable error. The rulebook says the ball is dead after a basket. How long do we really have to correct the error?" The interpreter's response was an explaination about the difference between the rule book dead ball and a clock stop dead ball (ie a dead ball because the official blew the whistle). I listen intently, and ask is this the way we are to call the games and interpret the rules? He says yes. Aaaaarrrrgggg!

The rules interpreter in our chapter also is an assignor. No one wants to get on his bad side, but we have a problem in that the rules interpreter doesn't know the rules. Those who know the rules are scared to stand up to this guy, but most just don't know the rules. This is my first year of getting a full varsity schedule (having got table scraps the last couple of years) and I was scared to death opening my mouth last night. This is the problem with Pennsylvania. Here, you take the test once, and if you pass, you never test again. This promotes myths becoming rules.

Part of me says, "you know the rules, just let it go." But then a part of me says "this guy is teaching our chapter incorrectly - you have to say something." Every year, he has explained situations to be called differently than what the rulebook says. Last year he told us it was okay for a player to get up off the ground with the ball if the pivot foot did not move!

Anyway, thanks for listening.