The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #46 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 11:24am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad View Post
Hey, maybe we should wait until we actually see/read the new rule and interps and case plays before we start worrying about all of the "what if's"...

I don't know. Just a thought...
Buzz kill.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #47 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 11:29am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by tref View Post
You know what Snaqs? I've been using the wrong rule in this case. The throw-in hasnt ended without being legally touched so that's why we cant begin a b/c count.
By common sense, I agree. By rule, I don't think it's correct.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tref View Post
I'd say no, as a mere tip by Team B during a live ball inbounds does end t/c for Team A.
I'm assuming you mean "doesn't", and I would agree. Besides, the intent is to not have free throws; so I doubt they would want to distinguish between pre-tip and post-tip for an offensive foul.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tref View Post
This is what happens when there are no meaningful games to be worked. *Bored*
yep, and I'm not worried about anything. I fully expect to enforce the rule as we think it's intended. The rule will be messed up some how, but communication will be sent out indicating the intent.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.

Last edited by Adam; Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 12:04pm.
Reply With Quote
  #48 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 11:32am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
PC is not required for the rule as it currently stands, except it's currently required for TC to begin. This rule changes that, in that PC will no longer be required to begin TC.
Either that or you define PC to include a ball in possession of a thrower....holding or "dribbling" a live ball without reference to it being inbounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
My next question would be to find out if TC exists "only" during the throw-in, or if it continues through a tip. IOW, is there a moment w/o TC between a tipped TI pass and PC getting secured?
I asked the exact same question. We'll see if they make it consistent and clean or a mess.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad View Post
Hey, maybe we should wait until we actually see/read the new rule and interps and case plays before we start worrying about all of the "what if's"...

I don't know. Just a thought...
Or maybe, those that are finalizing the rules and interps just might happen to see some of the questions here and will make sure they get it right to start with. They probably won't get it right/complete to start, but it doesn't hurt to be hopeful.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #49 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 11:37am
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Either that or you define PC to include a ball in possession of a thrower....holding or "dribbling" a live ball without reference to it being inbounds.
I don't think that would help, as it would still leave the change in when you start a BC or 3 second count.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #50 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 11:39am
Do not give a damn!!
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: On the border
Posts: 30,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad View Post
Hey, maybe we should wait until we actually see/read the new rule and interps and case plays before we start worrying about all of the "what if's"...

I don't know. Just a thought...
Yep.

Peace
__________________
Let us get into "Good Trouble."
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charles Michael “Mick” Chambers (1947-2010)
Reply With Quote
  #51 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 12:08pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee View Post
You're doing a great job maintaining his legacy.
Oh my!!

That's gonna leave a mark!
Reply With Quote
  #52 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 12:08pm
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Buzz kill.
I do my best!

Shutup.
Reply With Quote
  #53 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 05:32pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by tref View Post
You know what Snaqs? I've been using the wrong rule in this case. The throw-in hasnt ended without being legally touched so that's why we cant begin a b/c count.

...
I've always felt the rule and case books should more clearly spell out when a 10-second count should start on a throw-in. Hopefully if this rule is changed the NFHS might throw some case plays in the mix to address the 10-second count.

As far as NCAA rules I think it's inconsistent that on a throw-in the shot clock starts immediately upon a throw-in being legally touched but the 10-second count wouldn't.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #54 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 05:35pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by rockyroad View Post
Oh my!!

That's gonna leave a mark!
The word count for all my posts in this thread combined is still lower than any one single post from my buddy.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #55 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 05:58pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
I don't think that would help, as it would still leave the change in when you start a BC or 3 second count.
Aren't both already adequately covered? Team control IN the frontcourt for 3 seconds and team control IN the backcourt for the 10 second count. I guess that might have a count starting before a player gains control inbounds but I don't see that as a huge problem. I suppose you could change those count rules to only apply after there has been player control inbounds.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #56 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 06:01pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
I've always felt the rule and case books should more clearly spell out when a 10-second count should start on a throw-in.
Exactly what is unclear? The count starts when there is team control and the ball has backcourt status.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Reply With Quote
  #57 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 06:40pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Exactly what is unclear? The count starts when there is team control and the ball has backcourt status.
Section 10. (Men) 10-Second Violation
An inbounds player (and his team) shall not be in continuous control of a ball that is in his back court for 10 consecutive seconds.


That is all that the rules says. With all the other verbiage we have for other rules this is pretty bare bones especially since we have shot clock implications that are contradictory to the 10-second count if a throw-in is tipped.

It's pretty clear that when the ball is at the disposal of a thrower-in that the ball has neither front court nor back court status yet they felt it necessary to tell us that a throw-in from a spot adjacent to front court can be thrown to a person in the back court. Why is that spelled out in the rule book?
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #58 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 06:43pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
Section 10. (Men) 10-Second Violation
An inbounds player (and his team) shall not be in continuous control of a ball that is in his back court for 10 consecutive seconds.


That is all that the rules says. With all the other verbiage we have for other rules this is pretty bare bones especially since we have shot clock implications that are contradictory to the 10-second count if a throw-in is tipped.

It's pretty clear that when the ball is at the disposal of a thrower-in that the ball has neither front court nor back court status yet they felt it necessary to tell us that a throw-in from a spot adjacent to front court can be thrown to a person in the back court. Why is that spelled out in the rule book?
My guess is they added it just to clear up a misconception, it wouldn't be the only redundant rule in the book, either.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #59 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 06:56pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
My guess is they added it just to clear up a misconception, it wouldn't be the only redundant rule in the book, either.
Exactly. So what's wrong with clearly spelling out different scenarios for the 10-second count especially since the 10-second rule does not use the terms "team control" or "back court status" which Camron implies the rule does.

If fact what Camron wrote:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
Exactly what is unclear? The count starts when there is team control and the ball has backcourt status.
would tell us to immediately start the 10-second count upon a tip because there would be TC (inherited from the throw-in) and back court status (inherited from the player who tipped the ball).
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #60 (permalink)  
Old Fri Apr 22, 2011, 08:42pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,208
Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNewsRef View Post
Section 10. (Men) 10-Second Violation
An inbounds player (and his team) shall not be in continuous control of a ball that is in his back court for 10 consecutive seconds.


That is all that the rules says.
I thought we were talking about HS rules where there is no shot clock and, before now, there was no team control on the throwin.

Under that context....covering the timeframe where you always felt the rule was not adequate, what exactly was missing or unclear? Some things are just that simple.

I just noticed, while looking at the NCAA book, that player control is technically defined to exist during the throw-in.

Art. 1. A player shall be in control when:
a. Holding a live ball; or
b. Dribbling a live ball while inbounds.
Hmmm.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com

Last edited by Camron Rust; Fri Apr 22, 2011 at 08:50pm.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I violated rule #1.....not THAT rule #1 Judtech Basketball 148 Mon Jan 31, 2011 09:09am
Rule 6 3O enforcement - 20 second pitch rule wadeintothem Softball 5 Tue Jun 30, 2009 03:33pm
Rule 1, The Forgotten Rule TxJim Football 14 Thu Jan 04, 2007 07:02pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:21am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1