Shooting over backboard

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by heyref
It IS NOT illegal for a ball to pass over a rectangular backboard. What is illegal is for the ball to go BEHIND the backboard.

RnR, the only place your statement is true is in the NBA. If that's what you intended, then fine. But if you are talking about a high school or college game, I'm afraid you are simply wrong. My citation above is directly from the NFHS rulebook. I don't think it can get any clearer than that.

In fact, now that I think about it, the first sentence of your post is false, even in the NBA.

Chuck

[heyref]

Originally posted by CYO Butch
What's the citation for that? The Rule 7-2-Note says "When a rectangular backboard is used, the ball is out of bounds if it passes over the backboard." Is there something else involved in the HS rules that I missed?

When I said "pass behind" I meant "pass behind from above".
You have to remember the people who write these rules do not take much time to think out what they really meant to say. This rule is exactly one of those times. If you look up the meaning of the word "over" here is what you will find:
1.In or at a position above or higher than: a sign over the door; a hawk gliding over the hills.
2.Above and across from one end or side to the other: a jump over the fence.
They have chosen to use the second definition as their meaning rather that the first. After they state this, then they try to explain what they really mean in several cases. Here are some quotes directly out of the NFHS rules and casebooks.

"Ques. (1) - The ball touches or rolls along the top edge of the backboard without touching the supports. Is the ball dead? ANS. - No. "

"The ball strikes the side edge or top edge of the backboard from a pass or try from the front or back of the plane of the backboard.
Ruling: The ball remains live if it touches a side edge or top edge if it rebounds and comes down in front of the backboard."

Finally, What do you have if a player is standing at the corner of the court at the base line and passes the ball to a teammate on the other side of the court also in the corner at the baseline and the ball passes over the top of the backboard during the pass. YOU HAVE NOTHING.
In every one of these cases that the "RULES PEOPLE" have said is LEGAL, the ball has at one time or another "PASSED OVER THE TOP OF THE BACKBAORD".

So, once again, THE BALL IS NOT DEAD WHEN IT PASSES OVER THE TOP OF A BACKBOARD, ONLY WHEN IT PASSES BEHIND THE BACKBOARD (either coming from the front to the back or vise-versa).

If you disagree with the "RULES PEOPLE", let them know about it.

[rockyroad]

Oh good grief...if the ball passes from the front side of the backboard OVER the top to the backside of the backboard, it is a violation...if the ball passes OVER from the back side to the front side, it is a violation...it really is not very difficult to grasp this concept...

[heyref]

Originally posted by rockyroad
Oh good grief...if the ball passes from the front side of the backboard OVER the top to the backside of the backboard, it is a violation...if the ball passes OVER from the back side to the front side, it is a violation...it really is not very difficult to grasp this concept...

Except that is not what the rule says. Why don't YOU re-write the rule and then we will all understand it perfectly.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by heyref
In every one of these cases that the "RULES PEOPLE" have said is LEGAL, the ball has at one time or another "PASSED OVER THE TOP OF THE BACKBAORD".

I don't even know what to say about this. If you really think that the ball passed over the backboard in those situations, then you are not in touch with actual English usage. Using your thinking, if I stand on one side of a 1 foot high fence and jump 18" straight up, then land in the same spot from which I started, I have jumped over the fence. That's ridiculous. Nobody means that when they say "jump over the fence".

So, once again, THE BALL IS NOT DEAD WHEN IT PASSES OVER THE TOP OF A BACKBOARD, ONLY WHEN IT PASSES BEHIND THE BACKBOARD (either coming from the front to the back or vise-versa).

And using the second definition that you posted, that's exactly what the rule says.

If you disagree with the "RULES PEOPLE", let them know about it.

Respctfully, I don't and I won't. I think you're trying to be a little too clever for your own good, to be honest.

Chuck

[AK ref SE]

I try to keep it simple.....Front to back, back to front...violation.....if you were in proper position in either two or three man mechanics....in my opinion it would be really hard to determine if the ball went over the backboard from side to side.....and in most cases if it truly went over the backboard side to side...it would more than likely hit a support or bracket...at least where i officiate.

AK ref SE

[heyref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I don't even know what to say about this. If you really think that the ball passed over the backboard in those situations, then you are not in touch with actual English usage. Using your thinking, if I stand on one side of a 1 foot high fence and jump 18" straight up, then land in the same spot from which I started, I have jumped over the fence. That's ridiculous. Nobody means that when they say "jump over the fence".

And using the second definition that you posted, that's exactly what the rule says.

Chuck

Well, I'm gald I posted the definitions for you. Just curious why you chose the second definition instead of the first. Obviousley you feel no other ref would be stupid enough to think of it in terms of the first definition and wonder why the rules people have chosen not to clarify it for the rest of us "ridiculous" people as you have.

[heyref]

Originally posted by AK ref SE
.....and in most cases if it truly went over the backboard side to side...it would more than likely hit a support or bracket...at least where i officiate.

AK ref SE

So those Alaska refs make up stuff as they go uh. Interesting.

[AK ref SE]

heyref-
What did I make up?

Just made a statement that if it truly went over the backboard side to side that it would hit some sort of support or bracket.......

Guess I am using the same definition as chuck!

AK ref SE

[heyref]

Originally posted by AK ref SE
heyref-
What did I make up?

Just made a statement that if it truly went over the backboard side to side that it would hit some sort of support or bracket.......
AK ref SE

And if it did not?

[AK ref SE]

Then it more than likely did not go straight over the top of the backboard.....and it was a pass in front of the backboard.

AK ref SE

[heyref]

Originally posted by AK ref SE
Then it more than likely did not go straight over the top of the backboard.....and it was a pass in front of the backboard.

AK ref SE

I knew you would evade the question by making up a new senario.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by heyref

Just curious why you chose the second definition instead of the first. Obviousley you feel no other ref would be stupid enough to think of it in terms of the first definition

I gave you an example (above) to show why I "chose" the second definition instead of the first. The fact of the matter is that no one uses the first definition in a context that we are discussing. Literally no one I know would say in my above example that I had jumped over the fence, even tho according to the first definition you posted, I did jump over it. No one uses "over" in that way in that context. No one. So that leaves the second definition.

If, as you suggest, we use the first defitinition, the ball would be OOB on every high-arcing jump shot, since the ball is thrown higher than the top of the backboard. Since the ball is obviously NOT considered OOB in those situations, definition 1 cannot be the correct interpretation.

And although I would not use the term "stupid", I do think that no reasonable official would use the first definition in determining whether the ball had passed over the backboard.

I don't think I can say anything on the subject more clearly than that.

Chuck

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by heyref

I knew you would evade the question by making up a new senario.

Look Slider, he didn't make up a new scenario. He stated a FACT. In many of the gyms he works, the basket supports are directly above the backboard. So if the ball passed directly over the backboard from side to side, it would of necessity hit a support. Therefore, as a logical necessity, if it didn't hit a support, it didn't pass directly over the backboard.

[AK ref SE]

Not evading the question.....just going by your definition of over......if it were to truly go over the backboard from side to side......The ball would have to go directly over the middle of the backboard......and if I were the Lead official....I should not be looking up there anyway...and if I were the trail or the Center I would not be in an angle to determine if it went straight over the top of the backboard.....I am not evading the question...just giving you my opinion on the chances of it happening and being able to make the call. So what if! Game goes on is that what you want to hear.
And yes in Alaska we play by different rules...because some people think we are part of Canada....and other people think we live in Igloos!

AK ref SE