Re: Hmmm,
 

Tim C,
In real life, and a real game, I would say, : "Don't do that anymore!", but I would not repeat the statement.

As you know, regardless of the game, the higher the level, the less we have to use the strange rules.

The highest level that I've seen it called is Boy's HS Varsity. The violation was by a freshman point-guard who went out-of-bounds at the Free throw the lane on one side of the floor, continued running until he got on the other side of the lane outside the arc to receive a pass.

The kid got whacked and learned a rule.
Had the Kid not received the pass for the "3", the whole deal may have been overlooked. ;)

mick

The purpose of the rule is to deny a player from gaining an advantage by illegally using the OOB area.The most common occurence is laid out in Casebook play 10.3.4SitB.The usual way that this play is handled is by warning the player not to do it again-i.e.get back on the court immediately.If he/she is stupid enough to do it a second time,they deserve a T. Note that some coaches teach OOB set plays like this because they know officials are hesitant to make the call by the book(T).A quick word to the coach will usually get them to run the play properly and legally.

I can't ever remember seeing a T called for unauthorized leaving of the court. And I don't think that it would be warranted in this case either. I would like to know what would be an unauthorized reason? I've seen it said here that running out to save a ball is okay, but running around a screen is not. Where is the line drawn on this rule? I would think that the purpose of this rule is to avoid deception on one team over another. I remember seeing a play on TV where a kid ran out of bounds and through a set of doors on the left side of the court, ran down a hall and came in through another set of doors on the right side of the court. To me, that would be when the rule would be used, not for trying to avoid a screen.

I called it once.

Kid went and sat on the bench, then "remembered" he was in the game and was "miraculously" (sp) open at the other end for a easy cherry picked layup.

This raises a discussion I believe we may have had last year. To what degree is the official responsible to be sure that there are 5 from each team on the court. I always try to count players before the ball is put in play, but I don't see this listed as a general responsibility of the official.

In Brian's situation above, to what degree is the official responsible for checking the number of players on the court before starting play?

We started with 5. He sat down, whuch I have no problem with as long as he is down until the next deadball. But, he came back and got an easy bucket.

Wack.

Re: Hmmm,
 

Tim, and GFS --

The interpretation of the rule is the same in FED and NCAA.

The wording is better in NCAA: Deceptively leaving the playing court and returning at a more advantageous position for an unauthorized reason.

AR8 -- Screen, O-player goes out-of-bounds, returns on other side of lane: Ruling: T.

AR9 -- Screen, D player sees screen, steps OOB to avoid contact: Ruling: Not a T (generally)

(Obviously, I haven't typed in the full ARs.)

On the screen, I try to stop it the first time I see it (officials can set screens, too. ;) ).

Later on, I'd guess I'd call it (I've not seen a team attempt it after I told them to stop).

HS Boys Varsity game last season - 4th quarter, close game. We called a time-out. During the time-out the coach told a kid to sub in. The kid didn't get the message, so when play started again we only had four kids on the floor. The opposing team's coaches (all 3 of them) literally jumped out of their chairs and started screaming about the situation. Fans behind their bench joined in. The refs called a T. I am not kidding, their fans started dancing in the stands. It was really quite bizarre.

Not to mention quite wrong . . .

Okay, Mark, I'm an ignorant howler monkey, so I'll bite. :-)

From the discussion on this post I assumed it was because we only had four players on the floor. Where did I go wrong?

Officials Manual--page 86 #379--reads as follows "Officials shall see that each team has five players on the court. The offical responsible for putting the ball in play shall be responsible for counting the players on both teams".Notice the first word is officials and has an S on the end. I say this in my pre-game but add, if the other two officials are not holding up their hands to withhold play, they are just as responsible.

While the rules specify that a team consists of 5 players
there is no penalty for accidentally playing with fewer than
5. The T occurs when A5 realizes he should be on the floor
and runs in unbeckoned.

BTW1: IMO putting the ball in play with the wrong number of
players on the floor is always the fault of the refs on the
floor. It aint hard to count to 5 twice.

BTW2: Don't you coach little kids, like 8th graders? What
kind of behavior is that for parents? Sounds as bad as
little league

EDIT Oops, never mind, just reread your original post.
In this case the refs should hang their collective heads
in shame.


[Edited by Dan_ref on Nov 12th, 2002 at 10:12 AM]

IMHO
 

It is the responsibility of the officials to make sure that each team has the correct number of players on the floor before making the ball live.

Good officials always make sure of this . . . and I agree (if that is important to anyone) a team may select to play with less that five for their own reason.

Re: IMHO
 

This is true only if less than 5 are available. If he's got a sub on the bench, the sub must play.

Thanks for the replies everyone. I feel better.

Reforming myself is awfully tough, though. Especially after the last coaching clinic I attended, where we were required to take the "Effective Arguing with Referees when Your Team is Playing Like Crap" seminar.

I do like the book that came with it, though: "Coaching Cliches that Encourage Referees to Call the Game Your Way". You know, like "Call it both ways". In fact, I muttered that to a ref recently, and was immediately embarrassed. Y'all are ruining all my fun!