Rules controversy of lack thereof.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. · #1 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 04, 2003, 10:31pm

I am knocking on wood as I type this post, but it seems to me that so far this season has been devoid of any real hot buttons discussions. Hasn't anybody had a real doozy of a play or rules situation.

JRutledge · #2 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 04, 2003, 11:40pm

Maybe we all got in the high 90s for our Rules Tests?

We can only discuss 3 second violations so much.

Peace

Rich · #3 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 04, 2003, 11:42pm

What's a 3-second violation?

Rich

williebfree · #4 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 04, 2003, 11:47pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Rich Fronheiser
What's a 3-second violation?

Rich

That is how long any official is allowed to be on the local news sportscast?

Marty Rogers · #5 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 04, 2003, 11:48pm

How about a Varsity coach who responded to my request, "That must be a new rule." My request was that his bench players sit on the bench (since they were all standing to watch the game). Same coach went crazy when we called a held ball on a try that got stuck in the flange, and went with the AP. Another "new rule" becuase it has ALWAYS gone to the team who didn't get it stuck! Never figured out what planet this guy came from.

Rich · #6 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 04, 2003, 11:54pm

Tell him you'll reset the shot clock, too. That's always good in games when there is no clock. Better yet, tell him that getting the ball stuck is extra special and that the shooter gets credited with the field goal, just like basket interference.

When I had a team try to start with six I almost told the coach I had a minor penalty for too-many-men-on-the-ice^H^H^H^Hcourt.

Well, my Tuesday night off is in the books. Now games tomorrow through Saturday.

Rich

canuckrefguy · #7 (**permalink**) Tue Feb 04, 2003, 11:59pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
it seems to me that so far this season has been devoid of any real hot buttons discussions.

Hey, I already stirred the pot with the "PC foul on the defender underneath the basket" scenario...

I can only rabble-rouse so much, you know.

Maybe I should go out and call a multiple foul or something...

Nevadaref · #8 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 05:45am

You mean the offensive teammate touching the ball in the thrower's hands didn't do it for you?

rgaudreau · #9 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 07:46am

I'm not sure about that...

The chewing gum topic had generated almost a hundred posts.

All for Chewing gum!

Ren

hawkk · #10 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 10:33am

Quote:

Originally posted by Marty Rogers
Same coach went crazy when we called a held ball on a try that got stuck in the flange, and went with the AP. Another "new rule" becuase it has ALWAYS gone to the team who didn't get it stuck! Never figured out what planet this guy came from.

I actually would like to see his rule adopted . . . but that's mostly because I HATE the arrow . . .

Dan_ref · #11 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 10:47am

Quote:

Originally posted by hawkk

Quote:

Originally posted by Marty Rogers
Same coach went crazy when we called a held ball on a try that got stuck in the flange, and went with the AP. Another "new rule" becuase it has ALWAYS gone to the team who didn't get it stuck! Never figured out what planet this guy came from.

I actually would like to see his rule adopted . . . but that's mostly because I HATE the arrow . . .

Wouldn't be consistent, IMO. No team control on a shot, so we need to go to the arrow.

BTW, why do you hate the arrow?

williebfree · #12 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 10:58am

Quote:

Originally posted by hawkk

Quote:

Originally posted by Marty Rogers
Same coach went crazy when we called a held ball on a try that got stuck in the flange, and went with the AP. Another "new rule" becuase it has ALWAYS gone to the team who didn't get it stuck! Never figured out what planet this guy came from.

I actually would like to see his rule adopted . . . but that's mostly because I HATE the arrow . . .

Entertain these thoughts... on a shot attempt team control is "surrendered"; therefore, if the ball becomes wedged you are required to go to the AP.

(Perhaps this is the coach's logic

) Using the situation above, A shooter airballs and the ball sails out of bounds. Why do we not go to the AP in this scenario?

Is there a story, or history, behind why we go to the AP on a Wedgie and not on an airball that hits OOB?

Hawks Coach · #13 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 11:24am

Not sure of history, but clearly hitting the rim on a shot attempt and having the misfortune to get a ball wedged is different than not being able to find the rim. And I think the different treatment of each represents a fair way to deal with two very different situations.

As for AP arrow in general, I think a half a possession is gained/lost with every held ball. That is a far better way to resolve ambiguity than seeing who has the tallest player or best jumper. The held ball resulting in AP evens the playing field for a shorter team/player. If there were no AP arrows, I would instruct my short players never to get us a held ball against a taller player, because they risk a foul with no apparent gain - we are almost guaranteed to lose the ball. The AP rewards good defense, the jump ball has no relationship to how the game has been played.

Dan_ref · #14 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 12:08pm

Generally the ball becomes dead on a whistle. We need the whistle so one of the big guys can jump up & dislodge the ball. Since there is no team control and the ball is dead we resume play with the AP. It's all consistent, and completely different from an air ball going OOB (violation by shooter).

canuckrefguy · #15 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 05, 2003, 01:29pm

I can't understand how anyone would rather go back to jumping every tie-up. Officiate one 7/8/9 game, where they have a jumpball every 3rd time down the floor if you want to remember why they invented AP.