I had two situations in games last night that I am not sure we handled correctly.

1) Boys Var, 3 minutes left in the fourth quarter of a 30-40 point game. A1(#30) comes out of a time out and I notice he has blood on his jersey, so I tell the coach that they need to take care of it. He tries to clean it off with some saline but it doesn't come off. He ask if he could switch the kids jersey to which I say that he can but if they don't have an extra and he has to switch with a player that has already been in the game it will be a T. Just looking for clarification on this I think I know but not sure.

2) Boys Var 2nd game, last seconds of first quarter. A1 gets ball in middle of lane and goes up to attempt a shot, before he releases the ball the horn goes off. As the trail I am waiving off the shot immediately after the horn sounds. Underneath the basket my partner is calling a foul on B1 and counting the basket for A1(he wasn't paying attention to the clock because it was my call on the last shot). I go over to him and tell him that the shot wasn't released before the horn so the basket doesn't count. Now I am expecting to be shooting two free throws with the lane cleared but my partner says that the period has ended so there was no foul. My question is if the shot had counted we would have counted the basket and shot one, so why didn't my partner waive off the foul and which one of us is correct?

I have my own opinions on these but want to see what everyon else thinks, Thanks.

If you mean...why did my partner wave off the foul...it could be that he had a foul on an airborne shooter. In other words, the foul was after the shot was released and before the player hit the ground. Since you told him time ran out before the shot, the foul would have happened after time expired also.


I have found it better to not call anything unless you are absolutely sure of the particular ruling.
It's better to "miss a call", than call something and enforce an incorrect penalty. IMO

Dude





[Edited by RookieDude on Jan 14th, 2003 at 09:24 AM]

Dealing with first situation:
NFHS 3.2.2 Situation E
Team A properly submits its team member list and designates its five starters as required at least 10 minutes before the scheduled start of the game. Anytime thereafter, either before the game starts or during the game, the coach asks the scorer to change a number in the scorebook: (a) so it corresponds to what the team member is wearing; (b) because a player’s shirt has excessive blood on it; or (c) because a player’s shirt is torn. Ruling: In (a), a technical foul is charged to Team A. In (b) and (c), the shirt is changed and the number change made in the scorebook without any penalty.

Not a T unless the new jersey is a previously "played" (another player entered game with it)... Smart coaches (oxymoron :D)should carry at least one extra jersey.

Don't have my rule book with me at work, so I'm not sure about the T. However, the rule does say "excessive" blood? Also, if the blood was not on the jersey at the start of the game (getting at the jersey having a stain) and if the player did not have a fresh bandage somewhere, then you should have a blood issue with at least one other player...had to come from someone. :)

After the clean-up attempt with the saline, was the blood still excessive? After the clean-up, what would have been the risk of letting him play with that jersey? That is a serious question, not rhetorical. Would you still have the risk of contamination to other players? Could you deem the blood was no longer excessive and finish the game?

Just wondering.

Dude,
That's a possibility.
But it's also possible for the foul to have occured before the horn while A1 was making the habitual motion.
mick

Not clear why you differentiate between a new jersey and an existing player's jersey being the replacement. This case does not specify that only the jersey with the blood on it is subject to this rule. We are changing jerseys in the book because a player's jersey has excessive blood on it. The reason that A1 is going to wear A2's jersey is that A1 has excessive blood on his jersey.

By extension, if we switch these two back and forth the rest of the game, alerting the official each time what is being done and why, it is not clear that this is a violation of that case either.

mick...you are absolutely correct!
I was just giving Jerry another possible scenario...since I am sure your scenario is what he thinks happened.

BTW, mick, how do you like my philosophy on "not calling a violation", unless you know how to administer the penalty?

Dude

Be helpful.
 

Absolutely no T; I don't care who's jersey he wears.

First of all the blood must be excessive - it can be transferred to someone else if they touch it (not lick it or chew on it but transferable by contact). Adding saline may well make the blood more tranferable. If it didn't wash off, perhaps it wasn't transferable to begin with?

If the jersey does need to be changed then I'm gonna let the coach make any change he wants without penalty. Why would I penalize the team/player/coach for someone else's blood on his jersey? No one has done anything wrong. We're just going to correct a safety issue - get rid of the blood. And if the book has to make some adjustments then so be it. The player shouldn't wear various/multiple jerseys - just one change. No T.

As Larry pointed out, you still need to find the bleeder/source.

As for the foul, you need to ascertain when it happened in relation to the horn. Perhaps the shot didn't get off because of the foul ==> shoot two. Perhaps it was a trivial foul that didn't really affect getting the shot off ==> forget it and just say end of quarter.

If the ball was not released before the horn you can't count the basket. If the foul was determined that it was on the airborne shooter you would shoot two shots. If the foul was prior to the player becoming an airborne shooter then it would be a common foul with bonus shots if the bonus was in effect.

From the responses on the the first situation I'm still not clear on exactly what is the correct way to handle this. Since our game was a blow out we discussed the issue with the coaches and neither had a problem with the switching of the jerseys so we went on without any problem.

Second situation, I have a better idea of what I think should have been done. I think that we really should have shot two with the lane cleared whether the foul happened before or after the horn, because A1 was an airborne shooter the whole time. Not sure if I read this on the board or in the rule book so I don't have a reference but in a similar situation where the shot is released, horn sounds and then A1(shooter) gets fouled after the horn before he returns to the floor we would still call that foul correct? Isn't this the same type of situation except that the ball was released after the horn?

Perfect!

That's why you get to do 2 varsity games in a day. Good job!

There's no T for changing jerseys in this situation. It dopesn't matter whether the jersey has been played in or not. Now, if the kid who had his jersey taken away comes into the game, we have a different story.

If the shooter is not airborne and is fouled before the horn, shoot 2. If the shooter is airborne, he gets 2 shots, no matter when he was fouled, before or after the horn.

<b>
<i>I have found it better to not call anything unless you are absolutely sure of the particular ruling.
It's better to "miss a call", than call something and enforce an incorrect penalty. IMO

Dude</i></b>

Dude,
When we miss a "good call" purposely we have become a coach or a fan. It's an easy out to say "Didn't see it", as opposed to "Didn't know what to do about it cuz I failed to study my books enough." Not making the call is "safe". But If we wanted safe, we wouldn't put on the stripes.

A new official may call a foul, or violation, and not be able to explain it. <LI> I <u>once</u> called a multiple foul on an air-borne shooter and awarded 4 shots. When I reported it, I probably called it a double foul. Wasn't questioned by Coach or fans. (Knew the application, but not the penalty.)
<li> I <u>once</u> called a T on a player that left the court. (Knew the penalty, but not the application.)

Unfortunately, I have always learned more thoroughly by correcting my mistakes, than I have learned by being correct. Embarassment and self-deprecation are pretty good teachers.

Are we more inclined to look for answers when we are safe, or when we are sorry? ;)

mick

Great summary Tony.

What are you saying here Mick? Usually I follow you, but you completely lost me here. Are you saying because the player was off the court he was bench personnel, so you called a player technical on a player who had appropriately already left the court and become bench personnel? Either way, you can still call the tech, it's just a different type of tech, which I know that you know. But your statement as it stands is hard to figure out.

Good judgment comes from experience.

Experience copmes from bad judgment.

If the jersey becomes unusable (blood, torn, etc.) It may always be changed with any other jersey (previously used or not) without penalty.

Quote:

I think that we really should have shot two with the lane cleared whether the foul happened before or after the horn, because A1 was an airborne shooter the whole time. Not sure if I read this on the board or in the rule book so I don't have a reference but in a similar situation where the shot is released, horn sounds and then A1(shooter) gets fouled after the horn before he returns to the floor we would still call that foul correct? Isn't this the same type of situation except that the ball was released after the horn?

I must disagree here.

In the case you reference, the player had released the ball before the horn, so the ball actually remains live after the horn until the try ends. Also, fouls involving an airborne shooter apply until the shooter lands. So, any foul on the airborne shooter is penalized.

However, in the case at hand, an airborne shooter is a player who has released a try. While a try had started, it ended when the ball be came dead by the exipration of time with the ball still in the shooters hands. The player never becomes an airborne shooter. Any foul after the horn, is just that, a foul after the horn...to be ignored unless intentional or flagrant.

#1, allow the shirt to be changed, No T. Just make sure scorekeeper has knowledge of new number for player....

#2. If the foul was in the act of shooting but after horn went off, award 2 shots. Otherwise, unless the foul was int'l or flag, it is ignored as the period has ended.

Camron's post above about the 2nd situation made me think about exactly what the definition of an Airborne shooter is, so I went and looked in my rule book and section 4-1-1,2 are the defintions of an airborne shooter.

4-1-1... An airborne shooter is a player who has RELEASED the ball on a try for a goal or has tapped the ball and has not returned to the floor.
4-1-2... the airborne shooter is considered in the act of shooting.

Using my argument that I posted earlier, I was wrong because this isn't considered an airborne shooter so the period would end at the horn, unless we have something flagrant. This is assuming that the foul would have taken place after the release of the ball. Now if the foul occurred before the release and before the horn then we should have waved off the basket and shot 2. If the foul occurred after the horn but before the release we would again ignore it unless it is flagrant.

Thanks for your help Camron.

Let me know what you guys think based on the definitions that I gave.

Jerry

4-5 years ago, a player was on a breakaway, dropped a dime as he hit the endline, and kinda just stood there outabounds watching the other players play. I T'd him. I shoulda ignored him. I didn't understand the rule, intent, nor purpose. I shoulda just watched <u>like the Dude suggested</u>, but instead I made the worst call of my life. :o
mick

(Note to self: Watch yourself Dude, you are about to disagree with one of the smartest, nicest, and sincere of the big dogs.)

[Quote]Originally posted by mick
I once called a multiple foul on an air-borne shooter and awarded 4 shots. When I reported it, I probably called it a double foul. Wasn't questioned by Coach or fans[Quote]

This is exactly what I am talking about mick.
It is better to not make a call that you have no idea how to administer...than make a call and totally screw up the administration of that call.

In your example,(and I'm sure it was when you were a newbie official) you could have screwed the team out of a win by giving the other team too many shots!
All in the name of YOU getting better.
Sure, I agree with you that embaressment will make you a better official...BUT, will it make THAT game better.
These games are an excellent training ground...but don't make it at the expense of the game. Get better by reading and studying your rules, as you stated, before you call something that you have no idea how to administer.
Trust me...you will remember that situation that you passed on in the game...and if you are good, will look it up later...again, not at the expense of the game at hand.
I'm sure the Coach of the team that gets screwed by your missapplication of the rules would rather you get "better" somewhere else...such as here, or at home reading your rules. JMHO ;)

Dude
P.S. Remember, this is a speech for the newer officials or those just starting out...not you mick...just your philosophy on this one.


[Edited by RookieDude on Jan 14th, 2003 at 03:04 PM]

Dude,
I don't think we're disagreeing as much as we are both sending U.P. caution flags. ;)
mick

Yes. Amen. ...And so, it will be.

...and on this we can totally agree!!! ;)

Dude

As I essentially said above, the only way to be in the act of shooting after the exipration of time is to be an airborne shooter (an airborne player who has released the ball on a try ). If time expires with the ball in the shooter's hands, the try and the act of shooting ends. So, even if the player is airborne, they are no longer a shooter and can not be an airborne shooter. So, any contact with that player after the horn is not a foul unless it is intentional or flagrant.