Ill try my best to describe what happened.

It was very similar to a play where one member from each team is falling out of bounds with one of the players having the ball. The player with the ball throws the ball off the defender so he can maintain possession.

This is what happened. A player ran after a lose ball and regained posession of it inbounds. His momentum was going to take him out of bounds. Before he went out of bounds, he jumped, turned, and threw the ball at a player on the opposite team who was about 8-10 feet away who was still on the court. The ball bounced off that opposing player and then went out of bounds.

I assumed (because i seen this many times before in high school games) that the possession would go to the team who did not touch the ball last before it went out. Instead, the ref called a Technical Foul on the player who threw the ball at the other player on the opposite team.

I somewhat know high school rules but by far i do not know all of em. This ruling confuses me. Can someone clarify this for me? Thanks

Tell the kid he made a hell of a play and make your partner buy you a brown pop afterward for a bonehead call. The kids intent was obviously not to injure the player he threw the ball at it was to retain possession. Even if he hits the kid in the face I would have no T here as long as it was an EARNEST attempt to save the ball

JMO

In looking at the post again you may not have been one of the officials. If there were no post whistle theatrics as described below should be no T.

PS Disregard the brown pop statement none of us officials drink an occasional fermented beverage, I was just kidding!!!!:D

[Edited by MN 3 Sport Ref on Jan 14th, 2003 at 02:19 PM]

confusing ruling
 

It sounds like the ref may have called a T for taunting...if there was nothing unsporting about the throwing of the ball, all I can think of is verbal post-activity comments.

..
 

it happened right in front of me and there were no words exchanged between the 2 players involved. Just to clarify, i was in the front row about 2 feet away from the court and not acctually reffing the game. I was trying to overhear the ref with his ruling but the crowd was too loud.

What is a rule like this based upon? Intent of the player? If thats the case, the refs would have to be able to read minds, no?

Did he throw it really hard at the other player's head or his family jewels? That's the only way I could see even a slight justification for a T.

The way you have described the events does not sound like a T-ing offense. Understand that the official may have seen something else and felt there was a different intent.

Unless it was a cut and dried obvious ruling, one of the coaches was sure to be violently upset. If the coach of the team receiving the T wasn't upset, perhaps you missed something.

..
 

He did throw the ball pretty hard considering (obviously) that he did not want the kid from the other school to catch it. He threw the ball at his opponent and ended up hitting his waist/hips. There was about 8-10 feet seperating the two players. They were not side by side

..
 

Yes, the coach was pretty upset but I know that coach personally and he isn't the type to go totally nuts over a call. I think because his team was up by 14 may have made it a little bit easier to deal with

[Edited by South Bay HHVBC on Jan 14th, 2003 at 03:59 PM]

Not to question another official's judgement, but, based on your post, sounds like an awful call.

If it happened the way you say it did, the ref blew the call.

Unless the kid was aiming at the defender's head, no T. In those situations, even if the defender DOES get hit in the family jewels, no T. (I do, however, give the defender extra time to recover if he stays in the game. Most players, coaches, and fans are sympathetic to that).

Unless the game was plagued by trash-talking and rough play, and this was somehow linked to all of that (a tough thing to judge), no call for a T here.

This comes down to a intention situation. If, in the ref's opinion, the throwing player intended physical harm to the target player then the T (unsportsman like conduct)is justified. However, if the intention is to maintain posession of the ball then I have a "No Call"

An official's job is not an easy one by anymeans, and there is a lot of intentional/not-intentional evaluations that a ref must determine. However, you don't need to read minds on many of these situations. Usually an intentional foul is proceded by some verbal comments or increasingly rough play. A good ref can recognize this and often prevent it by calling a foul or two for rough play early thus preventing the situation from esclating to actual projectiles :)

..
 

A friends just brought this to my attention that I did not think of which might have been why the ref called a T. Is it possible that the ref felt that the player with the ball who threw it created an unsafe situation regardless of his intent? Does a technical result in this? Just a thought

I basically made this (BAD) call once. Note, I said ONCE. The situation was a little different but I was no more correct than the above mentioned official. There was a moderate distance between the players and there was no precedent to suggest any ill will. I had thought that the thrower was deliberately trying to injure the oppenent due to the force of the throw. However, in reality, he was just trying to throw it to a player beyond the opponent and was trying to put some zip on it to get it through. His aim was poor and it went straight at the head of the opponent. What was essentially clumsiness, I interpreted as intent.

I've never made that mistake again.

South Bay,the only one who knows exactly why he called the T is the ref who did call it.The only way that you are gonna find out for sure why he called it is if you see him somewhere and ask him about it.Everything else is just speculation on all of our parts.It doesn't sound like a "good" T,but he might know something that we don't.