Help

APG · #1 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 10:29am

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyBrown

In the first passage of Billy's that I quoted, wouldn't touching to gain an advantage be an exception under 10-3-4a?

In the second, wouldn't less significant contact than Billy describes need to be added if it caused the ring to vibrate (including when try in flight or ball touching backboard) under 10-3-4b?

The first part of Billy's statement simply tells us it's not basket interference to contact the rim or net while the ball doesn't have the rim as its base...even if it's in the cylinder...it didn't say it was legal to grab the rim...rather it said touch. Of course we can always issue a technical foul if a player grabbed the rim to gain an advantage.

Billy's second point I believe comes straight from a recent POE. No need to qualify it with 10-3-4b. One is going to have to strike the backboard with force to cause the rim to vibrate anyhow.

Welpe · #2 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 10:36am

The point is Billy's list is not intended to be a comprehensive list of what is legal and what is not (though I'm sure he has that stashed away somewhere

). His list is intended to debunk some commonly held basketball myths.

RandyBrown · #3 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 10:43am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe

The point is Billy's list is not intended to be a comprehensive list of what is legal and what is not (though I'm sure he has that stashed away somewhere

). His list is intended to debunk some commonly held basketball myths.

Gotcha.

Raymond · #4 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 10:49am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe

The point is Billy's list is not intended to be a comprehensive list of what is legal and what is not (though I'm sure he has that stashed away somewhere

). His list is intended to debunk some commonly held basketball myths.

Billy committed heresy in Randall's eyes. He posted something with clarity.

Randall doesn't believe it's possible to explain anything and still be right in fewer than 1000 words.

Still waiting for the first time Randall posts an actual rule. Guess the a$$-hat thinks everyone walks around with a rule book in their back pocket.

He's a clown.

Adam · #5 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 10:50am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Welpe

The point is Billy's list is not intended to be a comprehensive list of what is legal and what is not (though I'm sure he has that stashed away somewhere

). His list is intended to debunk some commonly held basketball myths.

Exactly. And if someone could describe a situation in which merely touching the rim would create an advantage, I suppose that would show Billy's statement to be slightly inadequate.

RandyBrown · #6 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:09am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Exactly. And if someone could describe a situation in which merely touching the rim would create an advantage, I suppose that would show Billy's statement to be slightly inadequate.

Any of you guys ever seen a high school player with the ability to contact the ring or backboard and use it to their advantage somehow? I don't think I've ever seen that, including as a spectator.

Jurassic Referee · #7 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyBrown

Any of you guys ever seen a high school player with the ability to contact the ring or backboard and use it to their advantage somehow?

Yes. Several times and in different ways.

Adam · #8 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:18am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yes. Several times and in different ways.

And always involving either slapping, pushing, or grasping; never mere "touching."

RandyBrown · #9 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:25am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And always involving either slapping, pushing, or grasping; never mere "touching."

Grasping and slapping, yes, but describe the pushing for me. Are we talking using the board/ring to reposition themselves to block a shot, get a rebound, or what?

tref · #10 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:26am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

And always involving either slapping, pushing, or grasping; never mere "touching."

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyBrown

In case I ever see it while working, please share, and maybe I'll be prepared. By the way, did you T it under 10-3-4a?

A1 goes up for a 2 handed dunk, while airborn he loses control of the ball & grabs the rim with his left hand before dunking the ball with his right hand.

RandyBrown · #11 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:22am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yes. Several times and in different ways.

In case I ever see it while working, please share, and maybe I'll be prepared. By the way, did you T it under 10-3-4a?

APG · #12 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:27am

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyBrown

In case I ever see it while working, please share, and maybe I'll be prepared. By the way, did you T it under 10-3-4a?

Believe me when I say, when you see it, it'll be patently blatant, and it'll call itself.

Jurassic Referee · #13 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:35am

Quote:

Originally Posted by RandyBrown

In case I ever see it while working, please share, and maybe I'll be prepared. By the way, did you T it under 10-3-4a?

Defensive player puts one hand on one side of the board to steady himself and swats the ball away on the other side with the other hand. "T" for the hand on the board and possible goaltending or basket interference on the swat.

Defensive player grabs the ring with one hand and swats a try away with the other. Same result. Technical foul and possible GT or BI.

Jurassic Referee · #14 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 11:16am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Exactly. And if someone could describe a situation in which merely touching the rim would create an advantage, I suppose that would show Billy's statement to be slightly inadequate.

It goes right back to knowing the purpose and intent of a rule. And that's also exactly why R10-3-3 and 10-4-1(i) says it's a "T" to grasp the rim, not merely touch it.

RandyBrown · #15 (**permalink**) Mon Apr 11, 2011, 10:42am

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The first part of Billy's statement simply tells us it's not basket interference to contact the rim or net while the ball doesn't have the rim as its base...even if it's in the cylinder...it didn't say it was legal to grab the rim...rather it said touch. Of course we can always issue a technical foul ii a player grabbed the rim to gain an advantage.

Yes, I understood the general context. It was the "It is legal to touch the ring . . ." that seemed to stretch things a little. I'm with you on the grasping part, but that is 10-3-3. 10-3-4 simply says "contact", then (a) says "Placing a hand". There seems to be a lower standard in 10-3-4.

Quote:

Billy's second point I believe comes straight from a recent POE. No need to qualify it with 10-3-4b. One is going to have to strike the backboard with force to cause the rim to vibrate anyhow.

This is the one I was thinking needed supplementing, as opposed to qualifying. It struck me that causing ring vibration should be added to the two conditions Billy mentioned, "attempt to draw attention to the player, or a means of venting frustration."