Who Let The Dogs Out ???
 

Regarding the NFHS 2011-2012 clarification: When an opponent contacts the thrower-in, an intentional foul shall be charged to the offender. Rationale: Any type of contact on a thrower is an intentional foul. The defender does not actually have to break the boundary plane.

Is a delay of game warning still charged to the offender's team in the cases where the offender doesn't actually cross the boundary plane? If so, under which of the following articles?

4-47: A warning to a team for delay is an administrative procedure by an official which is recorded in the scorebook by the scorer and reported to the coach:
ART. 1 For throw-in plane violations.
ART. 2 For huddle by either team and contact with the free thrower.
ART. 3 For interfering with the ball following a goal.
ART. 4 For failure to have the court ready for play following any time-out.

10.3.10 SITUATION C: Team A scores near the end of the fourth quarter and is
trailing by one point. B1 has the ball and is moving along the end line to make the
throw-in. A2 steps out of bounds and fouls B1. Is the foul personal or technical?
RULING: This is an intentional personal foul. The time remaining to be played or
whether Team A had been previously warned for a delay-of-game situation is not
a factor. If the team had not been warned, the foul constitutes the warning.

As usual, there will be case plays and rules interpretations issued by the FED before next season that should answer all of the questions that we have. Until then, everything is speculation. None of us can give you a definitive answer.

If it is really bothering you though, you do have two alternatives:
1) You can contact Bainsey's IAABO rules interpreter and get his answer to your questions. Then do the polar opposite of what he tells you. That should work.
2) You can sit in a corner with Nevada and chant "the sky is falling, the sky is falling" until the new case plays and rules interps come out.

Rock And A Hard Place ???
 

It looks like I'm caught between the devil and the deep blue sea.

Rose Colored Glasses ???
 

Are we both talking about the same FED? All of our questions? You have got to be kidding me. Have you been drinking Mark Padgett's Kool-Aid?

I'd be glad to sell some of my Kool-Aid to any of you guys. Just email me with your debit card number and PIN. Thanks. :rolleyes:

My reaction? Who freaking cares? It's only a game and the NFHS will only figure out how to screw up a rule or two that was never a problem before. And I'll still walk on the court in November and work and it won't matter a bit.

Who Cares ??? It Won't Matter A Bit ...
 

So let's say that you're working an early season high school varsity game.

Early in the game your partner calls a very rare "don't cross the boundary, but still foul the thrower-in" intentional personal foul, as the new rule states. He also reports it as a delay of game team warning.

Later in the game your partner calls a technical foul on the same team for failure to have the court ready for play following any timeout for having water on the playing court (I actually called a warning for this this past season, first one ever) after already charging a team warning for the "don't cross the boundary, but still foul the thrower-in" intentional personal foul. Opposing team makes both free throws for the technical foul, and later goes on to win the game by one point.

After the game, after consulting his rule book, the losing athletic director, after handing both of you your checks, politely mentions to both you, and your partner, that you guys might have blown the call, because his team only violated one of the delay of game criterion (water on the court) and should not have received a delay of game warning for the intentional foul on the thrower-in because the player did not go over the boundary line. Thus, his team should have received just a warning for the water on the court, and the opposing team should not have shot, and made, the two technical free throws.

He also tells you that he will be calling your assigner the next morning to discuss the call with your assigner, after which he says that he hopes that both of you have a "Happy Holiday", and that he hopes to see you guys again later in the season.

At this point, don't you think that it would have made a difference in how you, and your partner, would have felt about calling that game if you had known if the "don't cross the boundary, but still foul the thrower-in" intentional personal foul should have also included a team warning as part of the penalty? Wouldn't it have been nice to know that you and your partner nailed the call, or blew the call? Wouldn't it have mattered then?

And then there's always the possibility of a new rule, or a rule change, or a rule clarification, showing up on a preseason rules refresher exam, that, for some associations, counts toward the number, and quality, of assignments that officials get. If your association gives such an exam, then wouldn't it have mattered then?

Billy, these early rules handouts always get clarified before we have to walk out on the floor to use 'em 6 months from now. Sooooo, just take a Midol or sumthin' and try to relax a l'il. Spring is here, not late fall. Go forth and have some fun. Go out and cavort nekkid in your petunias. It'll do you a world of good.

I don't have "an assignor." And I don't have an "association" that "assigns games." And it's unlikely that the commissioners and coaches and ADs have a clue about the implications of these decisions, much less know how to piece together the appropriate rules to conclude we $#@$ed up. And I still don't give a $#%@.

They haven't even published these things yet. Let's let the NFHS completely %$#@ it up before we start whinging about it, k?

I actually had a situation that ended up in Struckoff's hands a few years ago. I had passed it to the state office, they sent it up the chain, and I was told I handled it right, although that could change in the future after it gets discussed. The NFHS cared enough about the situation that it didn't result in a case play, an interpretation, or a rule change.

Billy,

I am with Rich and JR on this. There is too much worrying about a rule that has not yet to make print yet. And I give them a little more credit as this is a college rule that has some standards for what has been done in the past. Maybe that does not make since to someone that does not work that level, but I am sure there will be a lot of similar wording and exceptions. I will worry when the rules and interpretation are in print. Then as said before we can complain how they screwed it up.

Peace

CARE Package ...
 

I'm not complaining. I'm not worried. I just thought that some interpreters out there might have some early insight into the implications of this rule. Other than that, I can be as patient as the next guy, as long as I'm on my medication, which is a lot stronger than Midol.

JRutledge, Jurassic Referee, and RichMSN: I can see your point, but RichMSN, you really should show at least a little interest in the implications of a rule clarification, especially since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum, and we don't want to give them the impression that we don't care about minor rule clarifications. We have debated, and discussed, much more minor rules, and interpretations, than this, on several occasions here on the Forum.

Springtime For Hitler And Connecticut ...
 

Petunias, impatiens, and tomatoes are going in the ground next week. Tomato stakes are going in today.

Billy,

I do not think that Rich does not care they way you are suggesting, I think we are jumping the gun. We will not know until the rules are written. And I know I do not care what a fan or coach thinks of my thoughts on the rules a few months before the rules are clearly written. And I really do not care what they think when they do not read the rules themselves when it is made available to them. Bottom line, wait until the rules are in writing and then we can discuss the wording. But right now all we would be doing is speculating about something we have no idea will have an answer. I teach an officiating class and have an official role with the rules and mechanics so I am really interested in what the ramifications mean, but not for the reasons you stated.

Peace

I dont know if you're being facetious here or not, it's hard to tell sometimes (and I think you prefer it that way). But while I'm all for debating anything and everything about which I disagree with someone, I'm not for telling someone else what they should show interest in or care about.

And as much as I've jumped in on this, in the end, it doesn't matter. Whether I ask the questions in this forum or not, someone high up will clarify before the opening tip of the hs season.

Billy, I'm not sure how you expect us to fully debate this when we don't have the actual rules and case book plays in front of us.

And also, you can't get on Rich for giving the impression he might "give them the impression that we don't care about minor rule clarifications," when you and Mark talk about not letting games go into overtime all the time. Regulars know that you are joking but "since non-officials (coaches, fanboys, etc.) are known to frequent this Forum," we don't want to give them the impression that we care if a game goes into OT or not.

"Word!!!!"

Peace

Time And A Half ...
 

I love working overtime games. The more overtime periods, the better. There's nothing more exciting. I have constantly "gotten on" Mark Padgett for claiming that he doesn't like working overtime games. I really don't believe him when he makes that claim. I wish he would stop, especially if he's pulling our legs. I will occasionally joke with junior varsity officials for "letting" their game go into overtime, holding up the start of our varsity game, but it's a joke between officials, I would never joke about this with outsiders.

Personally, I would allow all subvarsity games to end in ties with no OT possible. No, I'm not kidding.

Werd!

+infinity!

Can't Live With Him, Can't Live With Him ...
 

See what I mean. Is Mark Padgett a "get in, get out, get paid" type of official, doing it only for the money, or is he "yanking our chain"? Only his hairdresser knows for sure. I guess that it's part of his mystique. After all of his games, the fans, players, and coaches all ask, "Who was that masked official?".

By the way, there's nothing wrong with actually being a "get in, get out, get paid" type of official. Some officials are just in it for the money. It's a job. It's how they provide for their themselves, and their family. It pays the bills. It's just that athletic directors, coaches, players, and fans might think that if a few offcials are like that, then many officials are like that, when it's actually a much smaller percentage.

Mark does it because it gets him attention. That's it, that's the list.

And Rich's reasoning has nothing to do with get in get out. As a varsity official, he'd rather see that process because it keeps his own games on schedule; which would also be better for the fans and ADs.

There is nobody involved that wants late running preliminary games. I'm guessing MAYBE the JV coach cares. Maybe.

Last year, I was standing in the corner with both teams (small gym) waiting for the JV game to finish so I can stand across from the table for 20 minutes watching girls not dunk. Both coaches were there and were talking to each other and to us. You should've heard them and the varsity players as the game went to OT and then to 2OT. The visiting coach openly rooted for one of her school's players to miss a free throw so the game would be over. We were all laughing at that.

As it is, these games are scheduled very tightly so that the busses don't have to leave the schools any earlier. JV (called Sophomore games at some schools/conferences) games start anywhere from 5:50PM to 6PM around here and are played on the varsity court. It takes everything going perfectly well to start on time. A whistle-happy JV crew will push a game back 15 minutes, at least. An OT will push it back at least 15-25 minutes. 2OT? We started at 8:15PM.

The only recognition the JVs get is a one line entry at the bottom of the boxscore. It'll say something like "JV: Washington won." I've never seen standings printed or statistics kept and at many schools, kids will be held out of a quarter or two so they can play some time in the varsity game (OTs do not affect this rule as OT is considered part of the 4th quarter for purposes of that rule).

So why not end in a tie, then? It's not only the officials who think that way -- it's the coaches, players, administrators, game day staff, officials, security, custodians, etc.

Well said Rich. Were you at my 2OT JV Game last yr? :confused: The V Officials, who also watched from the corner, didn't like the delay, but they said we did a really good job managing the game.

They don't even get this much recognition around here. :rolleyes:

I never check the box scores, so I don't know if they get mentioned here.

I do......
 

One, my son is a HS junior. Having coached him and his buddies for many yrs, I like to see how his buds and their Team's are doing.

In the Washington Post they also list the box scores near the posting of the local Team Rankings. So when I look to see if any of my upcoming games have any "really good" teams, I might take a glance at a box score or two.

I'll check the games in the morning. They list the number of fouls called in a game and I'm curious (1) how many we called and (2) how that compares with the other games in the listings. Of course, before the games, I check the records of the teams, look at their schedules, and get the first names of head coaches before I go, too.

When in Rome......
 

I'd have to do some digging for this info.

The Post will list the "Top 20" Teams, their records, their next opponent, and their abridged box-score (as I recall - player, points, half-time and final score). For all the other info, I'd have to to look to the "interweb"..... most times it just ain't happening.

Now, in the smaller town where I grew up, yep, a lot of that info was right there for all to see.

They do not get that much mention here or the game. No one cares about those games but the participants and maybe their parents. Just a fact of the business.

I do agree with you there.

Peace

If the coaches don't want to play OT so badly or are worried about starting the varsity game on time, then the coach's should just agree to shorten the OT period or just don't play it. As is, I'm indifferent about non-varsity games going into OT. Doesn't happen enough in my experience to where we should just declare it a tie.

I don't need to check the paper to find out their first names. They all have the same first name to me, "Coach".

I actually agree with you. Only happened to me twice this season in 55 HS games. But it's funny hearing everyone complain about a 2OT game and we're the only ones that drove over an hour to be there by 6:30PM.

Personally, I'm thrilled with the conferences that play 7 minute quarters in the JV games (some do around here, some don't). Those 4 minutes cut do more to keep us on schedule than anything else ever would. And if they do play OT, they're just playing those 4 minutes anyway.

I do think the better solution would be sub 8-minute quarters. I could see having JV stay at 8, but having the sophomore, and both freshmen teams playing full 8 minute quarters is kind of crazy to me if you're trying to fit all those games in on one night.

I don't either -- I can look in the program I grab on the way in the school.

I use first names at all levels. I give the coaches every opportunity to use my first name (and most do).

And as always, this is a regional thing.

Most schools around here have 2 gyms and play the FR game(s) in the other gym. The JV game is usually the only prelim game in the main gym, and those conferences that play 7:00 quarters are the ones that usually start right about 7:30PM on most nights.

Agreed. That's the way I am too. We've had this discussion before. Six of one, half a dozen of another.

True dat!

Occasionally, early in the season, they'll have B/G sets here. F, JV, V for each. F games will start at 4:00 on each court, then JVB and VG start at 5:30 (with JV obviously on the aux court).

Or just schedule the games with a little more separation.

There are leagues here that schedule 4 games in a row on a court at 3:00/4:30/6:00/7:30. The last two games NEVER start on time and I've even started a 7:30 game as late as 8:30 (major injury in earlier game along with an OT). Other leagues just don't pack the schedule that tight and leave 1:45 between starting times....they rarely get backed up.

3pm games! I wonder who they get to do those...

We go 4:00/5:30/7:00

Getting to the gym by 6pm for a game that ends up starting at 7:30pm (after National Anthem & lineups) is the norm :(

+1

Simply pushing the V back to 7:30 would work here.