i've got a player who can jump a whole lot higher than me.

seriously though, i don't know...off to the case book!!

The distance from backboard to ring is less than the diameter of the basketball, so if anyone touches the ball while it is on the flange, they commit basket interference.

In fact, it'd be BI unless the ball had started falling after rolling off the flange.

Are you answering grunewar's question? If so, how does Bob's question play into the equation?

Sorry - I made an assumption (but I shouldn't've) that it was clear that the ball was still live.

My comment was to state that even if you rule that the ball is still live while it is stationary, and anyone jumps touching it, it is a violation. Having a situation like this is against the spirit of the purpose of rules, so it should become a dead ball immediately - and go with the arrow.

So the only way to rule it live it when you believe that a player can touch the ball without violating and that means the ball hasn't come to a stop, and even then, the player has to wait until the ball has started to fall.

Ok, good. I had a feeling you knew that, but just wanted to check. ;)

It's always good to be clear, especially if I muddied the waters. :D

Invitation to Mr. BillyMac......
 

Opportunity to post excellent clip from "A Few Good Men."

Col. Jessep: Have you ever spent time in an infantry unit, son?
Kaffee: No sir.
Col. Jessep: Ever served in a forward area?
Kaffee: No sir.
Col. Jessep: Ever put your life in another man's hands, ask him to put his life in yours?
Kaffee: No sir.
Col. Jessep: We follow orders, son. We follow orders or people die. It's that simple. Are we clear?
Kaffee: Yes sir.
Col. Jessep: Are we clear?
Kaffee: Crystal.

I saw it in a GJV scrimmage game last fall. After the whistle, one of the high school boys jumped up and knocked it off the flange.

I've seen it once. This is a violation by the free thrower as the free throw ends.

That is my understanding, on a FT it is a violation, on a FG try it is AP Arrow.

Had the ball get lodged between rim and glass on a 3pt attempt this weekend.

Sadly enough, I must admit I kicked the crap out of this call at the start of this season, ruled a FG "wedge" a violation. About a one trip up the floor later, I am kicking myself when I realize what I had done. Won't make that mistake again, and thankfully didn't this weekend.

Why is this a violation by the thrower? They did nothing wrong. This is no different if a shot is attempted and the same thing happens during any other aspect of the game.

Peace

JR, nice catch... poor choice of words on my part. I do not believe it to be a "Violation", rather a "missed FT".

So if first attempt on a 1-and-1, it is not an AP arrow, but a missed FT and turnover.

No, still an AP situation on the first FT if this happens. Yes they miss the FT, but no one has possession. It cannot be simply a turnover if the FT team has the arrow. The FT is missed yes, but not a violation.

Peace

Grrr. I hate to have to admit to swallowing a myth hook-line-and-sinker, but you now have me 99% convinced. Can you or anyone cite (NFHS) where I can find this?

I am starting to think the FT sitch is not the same as an inbound pass "wedge". About the only time I KNOW it is a violation and not AP.

All you can do is look under 9-1-3, but there is no reference to this being a violation, which means it is not a violation. And 6-4-3d explains why this is an AP situation.

It is only a violation if no one touches the ball on a throw-in.

Peace