Airborne shooter - Held ball

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
In this play, it is clear that B1 prevented A1 from releasing a try, but A1 was able to eventually get off a pass before returning to the floor. Big Joe would call a held ball on this play according to 4-25-2. Would you do the same or let play continue? Does it matter to you that A1 passed the ball from his hip instead of shot it as in the previous play I provided?
Basically, I am wondering if the first attempt for a try is prevented at time X, do we allow the player a second attempt to release the ball on a try or a pass at time Y (provided he has not returned to the floor), or do we call a held ball immediately at time X?

In the play above,B1 did NOT prevent A1 from the act of shooting or passing while A1 was airborne.Because of that fact,Rule 4-25-2 CANNOT be applicable in that case.The language in Casebook play 4.43.3SitA(b) fully supports that-i.e. "since the touching did not prevent the pass or try...,the ball remains live and subsequent action is covered by rules which apply to the situation". That means that you got nothing to call on this play because A1 fulfilled one of the two requirements(pass or shot) and didn't come down with the ball.

[baldy1]

Downtown
The lesson you might have learned is 2 fold.
1. If you have a disagreement with your partner, wait until after the game and both of you have had some time to unwind. In the heat of the game some officials take offense if you ask them about a call and can take it the wrong way.

2. About the jumb ball situation. I would say hold your whistle for a split second longer and let the play develop. If shooter gets ball off great, if not then I would call a jump ball. This is what I have been taught by veterns and at camp.

[finnref]

Hi Nevada. Does not 4.43.3 answer your question?

[Nevadaref]

Unfortunately, it does not. I believe that 4.43.3A(b) is describing very different action. It is purely a problem of diction. Here's the best way I can explain it:
That Case Book play uses the words, "touches the ball." I understand this to be different from contacting the ball in a forceful manner such that it prevents the release of a pass or a try.
Merely touching the ball could be a very light tap or a brush of the ball after the shooter has left the floor, but is still on the way up. Placing a hand squarely on the ball and applying significant pressure at the apex of the jump is certainly different from this.

Officials must understand the language of 4.43.3A in the way that I have just outlined. Otherwise, there would be a real problem with part (c) because one would not know whether to call a held ball or a travel. Here are the exact words for both:

4.43.3A(c) A1 jumps to try for goal. B1 also jumps and touches the ball and A1 returns to the floor holding the ball. Ruling: In (c), a traveling violation.

4-25-2 A held ball occurs when an opponent places his/her hand(s) on the ball and prevents an airborne player from throwing the ball or releasing it on a try for goal.

So if A1 with the ball jumps into the air and B1 then hits the ball with a hand after which A1 returns to the floor holding the ball, under the auspices of which rule does this play fall? Is it a held ball or a travel?

Do you now see how these rules would provide conflicting calls, if you considered the touch of the ball in 4.43.3A to be just the same as the contact with the ball that prevents the release in 4-25-2? It seems that an official must make the difficult judgment as to what contact prevents the release of a ball and what touch does not.
My point is therefore that officials cannot consider those same words "touches the ball," which are also used in part (b), to mean the same thing as the action which is being described in 4-25-2. I believe the rules committee had two totally different plays in mind when it wrote each of these.
Therefore, since one was not intended to provide a ruling on the other, and vice-versa, it would be incorrect to make the argument that we should be considering both rules when making a call on this play. One of them simply wasn't ever intended to apply to this particular play. I believe that one is 4.43.3A(b).
It is unfortunate for us that the English language can be so vague and imprecise, but we must deal with it. This happens to be one of those cases where the words chosen to describe a play in writing do not clearly convey a single image to minds of various officials. We simply see different things in our heads when we read these words, and since we are all not envisioning the same action on the court, this leads to substantial confusion.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
That Case Book play uses the words, "touches the ball." I understand this to be different from contacting the ball in a forceful manner such that it prevents the release of a pass or a try.

4-25-2 A held ball occurs when an opponent places his/her hand(s) on the ball and prevents an airborne player from throwing the ball or releasing it on a try for goal.

Do you now see how these rules would provide conflicting calls, if you considered the touch of the ball in 4.43.3A to be just the same as the contact with the ball that prevents the release in 4-25-2? It seems that an official must make the difficult judgment as to what contact prevents the release of a ball and what touch does not.

Difficult judgement? Nope! Probably one of the easier calls to make. If an airborne player passes or shoots the ball,you CANNOT say that that player has been PREVENTED from passing or shooting the ball.You,therefore,can't call them for a held ball,by the rule that you quoted above.It's that simple,Nevada.

[Nevadaref]

JR,
You appear to have tunnel-vision when it comes to your reading of 4-25-2. How can I make it clear to you that the English language permits two very different readings of this rule?

The last part of that rule says "prevents an airborne player from throwing the ball or releasing it on a try."

It is not clear from a simple reading of these words whether the defender must succeed in preventing the airborne player from doing both of these actions or only one of them in order to get a held ball. We must think a bit to decide which understanding the NFHS trying to convey.

For example, if I were to bet you $100 that I could prevent you from combing your hair or brushing your teeth (assuming that you have either one ), would stealing your comb be enough to win the bet or would I have to hide your toothbrush as well?

In my second play the defender does prevent the release of a try at the apex of the jump, and the player was clearly intending to shoot when he jumped, but then the airborne player is able to bring the ball back down to his hip and release a pass before returning to the floor. So the defender has succeeded in doing one of the two things stated in 4-25-2, but not both. Whether you understand this to be a held ball, by rule, depends upon how you understand that last phrase in the rule.
I believe that the NFHS expresses their understanding of that phrase to be that the defender must only do one of those two things when they tell us at what time to make the call. If they tell us to make the call right away, then they must want a held ball to result if the defender prevents either one, since otherwise they would tell us to wait and see if the airborne player is able to accomplish the other.
The proper time to make this call is made quite clear in this rule since it says that "A held ball occurs WHEN:" ....An opponent ... prevents...A or B.
That indicates that the held ball call should be made at the time that the try is prevented, not when the player returns to the floor. You have argued for holding the whistle until the latter happens. However, the rule does not say that the held ball occurs when the airborne player returns to the floor, does it? No, the rule and the case book specifically tell us otherwise, they say that the held ball results IMMEDIATELY even if the ball later comes loose. I must emphasize what is said and what is not said in the casebook play 4.25.2
In part (a) the airborne player returns to the floor with the ball. In part (b) the airborne player is unable to control the ball and it drops to the floor. In BOTH cases the ruling is "A held ball results immediately," not when the player returns to the floor, but "when airborne A1 is prevented from releasing the ball to pass or try for goal."
It can't be any clearer than that. The NFHS does not want us to hold the whistle.


[Edited by Nevadaref on Jan 21st, 2003 at 06:08 AM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
In part (a) the airborne player returns to the floor with the ball. In part (b) the airborne player is unable to control the ball and it drops to the floor. In BOTH cases the ruling is "A held ball results immediately," not when the player returns to the floor, but "when airborne A1 is prevented from releasing the ball to pass or try for goal."
It can't be any clearer than that.

Nevada,that's exactly what I've been trying to tell you.As soon as an airborne player is prevented from releasing the ball to pass or try for goal,you have a held ball.If you DON'T prevent them,you don't have a damn thing.It's not tunnel vision.It's the rule.You can write 1000-word essays from here to eternity and you can't change the meaning of the word "prevent".

I'm just quoting the same things to you over and over.Why don't you just forget about me and call it your way.Argument's over.Let us know how it turns out the first time that you call a held ball when an airborne player actually gets a shot off and scores,though.

[just another ref]

Tonight I was in the stands watching a VB game. I don't know about everybody else, but this is the only time that people ask my opinion. Kid started to take a shot from 15', defender came flying at him from in the paint jumped and got a hand on the ball and held it firmly. If both players had been simply standing flat footed, it certainly would have been a held ball. However, when the defender came down, he collided, torso to torso with the shooter, doing everything but knocking him to the floor. Official called a foul. I was sitting with the fans of the defensive team. A guy turned to me: "Jump ball! Wasn't that a jump ball?" I said no, that I agreed with the call, that when you jump up in the air and come down on top of somebody, it's pretty much gonna be a foul. He was satisfied, but I got to thinking, can a held ball be called while the defender is in midair, thus making this contact after the whistle irrelevant. The contact in this case was substantial, but certainly not intentional or flagrant. Is there a casebook play that deals specifically with this?

[RookieDude]

Casebook play 11.11.1

An "airborne defender" may create a held ball situation, any activity thereafter must be ignored...unless judged intentional or flagrant by the official.

Dude

[just another ref]

Originally posted by RookieDude
Casebook play 11.11.1

An "airborne defender" may create a held ball situation, any activity thereafter must be ignored...unless judged intentional or flagrant by the official.

Dude

The publishers musta played a cruel joke on me, cause my casebook doesn't go up to 11. anything.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by just another ref
Kid started to take a shot from 15', defender came flying at him from in the paint jumped and got a hand on the ball and held it firmly. If both players had been simply standing flat footed, it certainly would have been a held ball. However, when the defender came down, he collided, torso to torso with the shooter, doing everything but knocking him to the floor. Official called a foul. I was sitting with the fans of the defensive team. A guy turned to me: "Jump ball! Wasn't that a jump ball?" I said no, that I agreed with the call, that when you jump up in the air and come down on top of somebody, it's pretty much gonna be a foul. He was satisfied, but I got to thinking, can a held ball be called while the defender is in midair, thus making this contact after the whistle irrelevant. The contact in this case was substantial, but certainly not intentional or flagrant. Is there a casebook play that deals specifically with this?

Here's where oft-quoted Casebook play 4.25.2 does give you some guidance,I think.In (a),the shooter is prevented from releasing the ball and you have a held ball as soon as he returns to the floor.Any contact after that could be ignored,as you say,if it is not intentional or flagrant.Similarly,in (b),if the airborne player is prevented from passing or shooting and the ball then comes loose and hits the floor,you can call the held ball and ignore subsequent contact unless intentional or flagrant.I think that if you have the contact before A comes down or the ball comes loose though,that you probably gotta call the foul in this case.

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Here's where oft-quoted Casebook play 4.25.2 does give you some guidance,I think.In (a),the shooter is prevented from releasing the ball and you have a held ball as soon as he returns to the floor.

ARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! This is so frustrating.
This is exactly what I have been trying to tell you for two full pages, JR.

You have a misunderstanding of when a held ball occurs in this case.

In the quote above you have incorrectly written that we "have a held ball as soon as he returns to the floor." To make it even more aggravating, you even quote casebook play 4.25.2, which says very clearly that the held ball results immediately when airborne A1 is prevented from releasing the ball, and then go on to make this contrary statement!
According to the casebook, not just me, this held ball occurs way before A1 returns to the floor. It is right there in black and white. You now have to concede that the held ball call should be immediate, as the case book says, and not when the player returns to the floor.

Just another ref,
I would call the play you described a held ball immediately when the try was prevented. I would not wait for the player to return to the floor as JR advocates, and therefore, the contact after the held ball would be ignored.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref

ARRRRRRGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! This is so frustrating.
This is exactly what I have been trying to tell you for two full pages, JR.

You have a misunderstanding of when a held ball occurs in this case.
[/B][/QUOTE]Nope,for two full pages,you've been trying to tell me that you can call a held ball even though an airborne shooter ISN'T prevented from passing or shooting the ball.That's completely wrong and you don't have any rule that will support that.Casebook play 4.25.2 isn't applicable in any way,shape or form unless the airborne shooter is actually prevented from releasing the ball to pass or try for goal.That's the exact wording from it. I don't misunderstand this rule at all.I know what the word "prevent" means and I also know how the rule should be called.As I said before,call it your way if you want.Should be interesting when you wipe out a game-winning basket that was shot before the player came down,and you call a jump ball instead because the player was prevented from shooting.

[hawkk]

JR and NR-

Seems to me that your debate comes down to a simple disagreement about timing:

Per JR, a player is not prevented from releasing the ball if he is able to release BEFORE HE RETURNS TO THE GROUND.

Per NR, a player is prevented from releasing the ball AS SOON AS THE EFFORT TO RELEASE IS STOPPED AND THE BALL IS MOVED BACK FROM THE DEFENSIVE FORCE.

The rule itself does not answer the question, it just says prevent from releasing -- if anything, I think that favors NR's interpretation.

Case book plays that you've both discussed shed more light. The case NR cited says that if the ball comes loose before the offensive player comes down, it is still a jump. That means the rule CAN'T require the player to come down with the ball to have a jump.

What the rule requires, I submit, is a JUDGMENT by the official as to whether the defenders action PREVENTED AN ATTEMPTED RELEASE of the ball. The fact that the player managed to toss the ball a different direction AFTER THE FACT does not NECESSARILY mean that the defender did not PREVENT the release -- BUT it can (and perhaps should) affect your JUDGMENT as to whether the defender PREVENTED the release, or whether the offensive player DECIDED not to release the ball and do something else because it was going to be blocked.

Like any judgment call, seems to me that there is room for a difference of opinion on the judgment as to whether the release was prevented or not.

[Hawks Coach]

hawkk
You did a great job of summing things up. My take on the case was 180 degrees different than yours. That is, if NF wanted to say initial release prevented, then second release attempted and succeeded, results is held ball, they would have done so. I read the case as saying that dropping the ball after your release was initially stopped does not amount to a release as a pass or shot, so held ball still occurs.

I think that JR made a good point that his interpretation is the one that is taught at clinics. It doesn't make it right, because we know even experienced refs don't always have correct interpretations (and this discussion proves that point - one side or the other is wrong, and we have lots of experience speaking here). However, it has always seemed apparent to me that if you release a shot or pass, you were not prevented from releasing a shot or pass. If you drop the ball after your attempt was stopped, you were prevented from releasing a shot or pass - held ball, and that is the purpose of the case.

Unfortunately, we cannot resolve this difference because the case book is silent on the critical issue. Pick a way to call it and call it consistently.