.3 Seconds on the Clock

[williebfree]

Greetings All!

7th grade boys; Home team (White) down by 3 pts, loses ball OOB on their baseline, .3 second on clock. Visitors (blue) call time out to set up inbound play.

After time-out Blue is administered the ball for throw-in. At count of 4, inbounder makes a high and long pass to his teammate at sideline (division line). B2 clearly steps on OOB line as he leaps to make the catch. (Whistle blown)

Ball is returned to the original throw-in spot (White baseline) for a White throw-in. White calls time to set up inbound play.

Additional information to consider in this equation:
With 2.3 on the clock at the end of the first half, the timer let the hometeam (White) inbound the ball, make a pass to another teammate, A3 makes a two bounce dribble around a defender and launched a 22 foot shot. Buzzer did not sound until after the ball made contact on the rim.
Bottomline: Anticipate VERY favorable clock "management"

Also, I have officiated games with the Blue coach and I know that he is aware that you cannot have a legal shot with .3 or less on the clock.
Bottomline: Anticipate a coach who could be very PO'd if this goes into OT.

What do you do in this situation?

I will post what we did after responses are made.

[Jeremy Hohn]

Well with that little of time, according to the rule book, all you can have is a "tap". As soon as either team does more than that, i.e. a catch or grasp of any kind, blow your whistle, and call the game. Simple as that.

[Hawks Coach]

Originally posted by williebfree

After time-out Blue is administered the ball for throw-in. At count of 4, inbounder makes a high and long pass to his teammate at sideline (division line). B2 clearly steps on OOB line as he leaps to make the catch. (Whistle blown)

NF rules, clock starts when first touch is made, I am not clear how time did not expire on this inbounds even with the violation, especially with reaction time. I would have had the game over on the throw-in personally.

Eliminates a lot of discussion. Just my thought.

iven the situation, I would go off precise knowledge of the time and not award points on anything but a tap by the home team.

[JLK]

Wouldn't white's throw in be at the spot blue stepped out of bounce (sideline)? Or was blue OOB to begin with (in that case, bring it back to original throw in spot)?

A suggestion to do regarding .3 showing on the clock:

Inform both coaches that they only way a basket will be scored is by tap only. Anything else will result in game being over regardless of the timer/horn.

[williebfree]

Originally posted by JLK
Wouldn't white's throw in be at the spot blue stepped out of bounce (sideline)? Or was blue OOB to begin with (in that case, bring it back to original throw in spot)?

B2 clearly steps on OOB line as he leaps to make the catch. (Whistle blown)

Meaning he was OOB BEFORE he made contact with the ball.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by williebfree
B2 clearly steps on OOB line as he leaps to make the catch. (Whistle blown)

Meaning he was OOB BEFORE he made contact with the ball.

That doesn't matter. B2 is the player that violated. The throw-in is from where B2 touches the ball. It doesn't matter whether he was OOB prior to touching the ball. The fact is that he, not the thrower, caused the violation.

As far as the inbounds play goes, JR is correct.

[just another ref]

Originally posted by JLK
Inform both coaches that they only way a basket will be scored is by tap only. Anything else will result in game being over regardless of the timer/horn. [/B]

Others may disagree, but I think that this is dangerous to start reading the rules to the coaches before the play happens. They should already know the only way to score is by a tap. If you tell them in this case the next thing you call you may hear: "Why didn't you warn me about that one?"

[williebfree]

Additional information:

I know the coach of Blue (visiting team) fairly well and feel safe in saying that he is not going to make an issue if the teams play out the clock. I also have a good rapport with the home coach. This game has had countless lead changes throughout... neither team led by more than 6 points.

During the home team's last timeout, I approached the Referee and reminded him that according to the rules, there is not enough time to attempt a legal shot with .3 second or less. The R is doing his 1st game of the year and I had been the R in the B game (1st game of the night). His decision was to let them "play it." I agreed.

What happened?

A1 inbounds the ball to opposite corner. A2 pumps up a 3-pt shot that bangs off the rim as the horn sounds.

Immediately following the horn, the visiting coach raced over and adamantly thanked us for letting the kids finish the game.

If it had been a HS game, I would not have had any qualms about strictly adhering to the letter of the rule. In fact, I would have insisted on it.

[Hawks Coach]

I don't understand what decision there is to make about letting them play it. If there is time, and it is a three point game, anything can happen. How about a foul on team with lead before ball is inbounded, results in 1 and bonus FTs, 1st FT sunk, second FT missed and tapped in, tie game. And don't think the foul may not happen. Some rocket scientist coach may decide that he heard Billy Packer suggest a foul before the inbounds once on tv, blah blah blah. . .

As you can probably guess, I am not a big fan of telling the coaches the rules before the inbounds. Make them know the rules and decide their strategy. And let the game end how it will. Just my take on this one.

[cmonref]

Here is what willie really did he stopped the game and called kinny, aka "mr. basketball offical" and confered with him on what to do and then did the exact opposite didn't you? willie and i reffed a lot of ball together at one point in time and whenever i have the opportunity to give him shi#, i do it (see signature)

[williebfree]

HAWKS COACH...

We did pretty much as you stated. Nothing was mentioned to the coaches. And as you indicated, anything COULD have happened; especially at the 7th Grade level.

CMON...
Blue was your hometown team. No, "Mr. Basketball" was the last person I thought about consulting.

Have a great Thanksgiving everyone!!!

[Nevadaref]

But Willie,
You and your partner still messed up the play by awarding the throw-in on the endline. As some others have said, the proper spot would have been near the division line where the player violated. While this is a throw-in violation, and you were right not to start the clock, you must adhere to the nearest spot provision of the rule.
Just consider if this player had stepped OOB at the opposite endline while jumping to catch a length-of-the-court throw-in pass, the opposing team would get a real advantage if you brought the throw-in all the way back down the court with very little time remaining.
If one is going to pull out the obscure from the rules book, then one had better know the whole thing!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by williebfree
Have a great Thanksgiving everyone!!!

Not everyone is gonna have a great Thanksgiving,Willie...

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
But Willie,
You and your partner still messed up the play by awarding the throw-in on the endline. As some others have said, the proper spot would have been near the division line where the player violated. While this is a throw-in violation, and you were right not to start the clock, you must adhere to the nearest spot provision of the rule.
Just consider if this player had stepped OOB at the opposite endline while jumping to catch a length-of-the-court throw-in pass, the opposing team would get a real advantage if you brought the throw-in all the way back down the court with very little time remaining.
If one is going to pull out the obscure from the rules book, then one had better know the whole thing!

I thought the rule was that the thrower-in violated because she did not pass the ball directly onto the court where it would be legally touched by a player. The person who was oob did not violate.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by rainmaker
I thought the rule was that the thrower-in violated because she did not pass the ball directly onto the court where it would be legally touched by a player. The person who was oob did not violate.

7-6-1 "The throw-in pass shall touch another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched."

If the pass (otherwise legal) touches a player, it's a legal throw-in. The touching may be (and is, in the case being discussed) a violation.