The Official Forum - slapping the back board/ goal tending

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)

- Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)

- - slapping the back board/ goal tending (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/754-slapping-back-board-goal-tending.html)

A1 is going for a layup B1 is coming from behind jumps and miss the ball but slaps the board. A1 misses the shot. Is this goal tending? I thought you could not touch the net or board when the ball is around the cylinder.

If the slapping of the board is a legitimate result of attempting to block the shot, there is no violation. If it is intentional, it is a technical foul (NF rules).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Mark Padgett:
If the slapping of the board is a legitimate result of attempting to block the shot, there is no violation. If it is intentional, it is a technical foul (NF rules).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

In the cases book 10.3.6 under the comment
"The purpose of of the rule is to penalize intentional or deliberate contact with the backboard. Contact which occurs incidentally in playing the game is allowed, but when slapping or striking is intentional or deliberate or is so forceful it cannot be ignored, a technical foul must be charged"

for the above incident 2 things must be taken into consideration was the defensive player intentionally trying to contact the board, if no did the contact with the board keep the ball from entering the goal(this is purely judgement on the officials part) if both answers are no the this should be a no call,
if yes to either question then a T must be called.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by PAULK1:
for the above incident 2 things must be taken into consideration was the defensive player intentionally trying to contact the board, if no did the contact with the board keep the ball from entering the goal(this is purely judgement on the officials part) if both answers are no the this should be a no call,
if yes to either question then a T must be called.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Only the first question need be asked / answered. The effect (if any) on the ball is ignored. If the ball goes in, despite (or because of) the contact, the basket counts. If the ball does not go in, it does not count.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by bob jenkins:
Only the first question need be asked / answered. The effect (if any) on the ball is ignored. If the ball goes in, despite (or because of) the contact, the basket counts. If the ball does not go in, it does not count.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
as mentioned in the above ref: "or if the force of the contact cannot be ignored" it doesnt matter if it was intentional or not. If a player going for the ball and contacts the board hard enough that it throws a shot off the rim or out of the cylinder this has got to be a T.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by kent wilson:
A1 is going for a layup B1 is coming from behind jumps and miss the ball but slaps the board. A1 misses the shot. Is this goal tending? I thought you could not touch the net or board when the ball is around the cylinder. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The "T" call is judgment-based. To me if it's a legitimate shot block attempt, I have nothing. The contact on the board would have to be very intense for me to call a "T" in the case of a shot block attempt. When a player is running, jumps, and swats in an attempt to block (i.e. the player is in motion, the backboard is not) contact with the backboard could be hard (a moving object hitting a stationary one). Totally judgment based call. As for the goaltending question, there are five criteria that MUST be met, without exception, in order to call goaltending on plays other than free throws, (1) there must be a tip, tap or try, (2) the ball must be in its downward flight, (3) the entire ball must be above the level of the ring, (4) the ball must have a possibility of enetering the basket in flight, and (5) no part of the ball can be in the imaginary cylinder which has the ring as its lower base. If all five are met and the ball is swatted away, you have goaltending. If any of the five are missing, you have nothing with the exception that if any part of the ball is in the imaginary cylinder and it is touched by anyone from either team, you have basket interference. It is also goaltending if a player touches a free throw that is outside the imaginary cylinder regardless of whether it is on its upward or downward flight. Basket interference occurs when any part of a live ball (doesn't have to be a tip, tap or try) in the imaginary cylinder is touched by a player (from either team), or if the ball is touching any part of the basket and a player touches any part of the basket (i.e. ball touching the rim and a player touches the net, ring, flange, etc.), or a player reaches through the basket from below and touches the ball before it enters the cylinder. Therefore, the act of slapping the backboard has nothing to do with goaltending or basket interference. It is either a technical foul or its nothing.

In NCAA, basket interference also occurs if a "movable basket ring" is pulled down by a player so that the ring contacts the ball before the ring returns to its original position.

Two comments, one on what bob said and one on what Walter said. First of all, let me say they both gave great answers.

Bob's comment that if the force of the swat hits the board so hard that it cannot be ignored, then it's a T is absolutely correct according to NF rules. However, I never call it if I think the shot block attempt was legitimate. How can I reconcile this with the rule? Here's my rationalization: I get to decide if the amount of disruption to the backboard is or is not enough to ignore. It's a judgement call on my part. I am very good at ignoring things (just ask my wife). I feel that if B1 absolutely tried to block the shot but just missed, he should not be penalized for being strong.

Walter analyzed the goaltending, BI and technical rules much in the same manner that I approach the over and back call. That is, there are certain elements to the call and if all of the elements are present, you make the call. If even one element is missing, you have no call. I would like him to point out, however, an example of the goaltending call during a free throw that he addressed, now that players cannot go into the lane until the ball hits something. How can you now have this call? Can you have a goaltending call if the ball has hit the backboard, a player goes into the lane then and somehow touches the ball as it is on it's downward flight into the basket from the board? And if that was even possible (and I don't think anyone is that fast), wouldn't it be BI and not goaltending? Is BI during a free throw also a technical?

I'm sure Walter will give us his usual expert analysis. This is not a tongue-in-cheek put down, but real praise for his insight.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mark Padgett:

Walter analyzed the goaltending, BI and technical rules much in the same manner that I approach the over and back call. That is, there are certain elements to the call and if all of the elements are present, you make the call. If even one element is missing, you have no call. I would like him to point out, however, an example of the goaltending call during a free throw that he addressed, now that players cannot go into the lane until the ball hits something. How can you now have this call? Can you have a goaltending call if the ball has hit the backboard, a player goes into the lane then and somehow touches the ball as it is on it's downward flight into the basket from the board? And if that was even possible (and I don't think anyone is that fast), wouldn't it be BI and not goaltending? Is BI during a free throw also a technical?

Well Mark, thanks for the kind compliment. I've looked long and hard for a textbook answer for you and the best I've seen is free throw lane restrictions end (NFHS and NCAA except for players in marked lane spaces) when the ball hits either the backboard or the rim or the free throw ends (successful, certain it will not be successful, hits floor or player, etc.) Therefore, her's what I believe. If a player is leaves a marked lane space and breaks its vertical plane, obviously he/she violates. The whistle is immediate and the ball becomes immediately dead if it is a teammate of the free throw shooter. If the offensive player is really, really stupid (doesn't like his teammate, etc.) and then swats the free throw away, technical foul also. However, the free throw provision of the goaltending rule exists primarily in the case of an opponent of the free thrower leaving a marked lane space before the restrictions end and subsequently swatting the ball away. In fact, Rule 9-12 (NFHS) says exactly that. The NCAA says that no player shall touch a ball that is outside the cylinder on a free throw attempt (rule 9-15 NCAA). Remember, if an opponent violates it's a delayed whistle, ball remains alive, until the free throw ends (nothing if the ball goes in). However, violation by an opponent, then swats the ball away, now whistle right away, technical foul.

As to your other point, once the ball reaches the imaginary cylinder, all other provisions of basket interference apply. Goaltending on a free throw applies only when the ball is outside the cylinder and the ball can be going up or down. The penalties according to rule 10-3-11 (NFHS)and 10-3-m (NCAA) are the same for goaltending on a free throw, technical foul on the offending player, count the point, 2 shots and the ball. NCAA on BI on a free throw is count the point and play on (Rule 9-16 NCAA). NFHS is a technical foul for BI on a free throw, award the point, 2 shots and the ball. In all situations, award the point then assess the penalties.

Hope this answers your questions. That's my interpretation. I'm sure if I've messed it up, someone on this board will point it out. Thanks again for you comments.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by walter:

Hope this answers your questions. That's my interpretation. I'm sure if I've messed it up, someone on this board will point it out. Thanks again for you comments.[/B]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Is that your final answer? OK - you knew someone was going to say it sooner or later http://www.refereeforum.com/ubb/wink.gif

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by walter:
The "T" call is judgment-based. To me if it's a legitimate shot block attempt, I have nothing. The contact on the board would have to be very intense for me to call a "T" in the case of a shot block attempt. When a player is running, jumps, and swats in an attempt to block (i.e. the player is in motion, the backboard is not) contact with the backboard could be hard (a moving object hitting a stationary one). Totally judgment based call. As for the goaltending question, there are five criteria that MUST be met, without exception, in order to call goaltending on plays other than free throws, (1) there must be a tip, tap or try, (2) the ball must be in its downward flight, (3) the entire ball must be above the level of the ring, (4) the ball must have a possibility of enetering the basket in flight, and (5) no part of the ball can be in the imaginary cylinder which has the ring as its lower base. If all five are met and the ball is swatted away, you have goaltending. If any of the five are missing, you have nothing with the exception that if any part of the ball is in the imaginary cylinder and it is touched by anyone from either team, you have basket interference. It is also goaltending if a player touches a free throw that is outside the imaginary cylinder regardless of whether it is on its upward or downward flight. Basket interference occurs when any part of a live ball (doesn't have to be a tip, tap or try) in the imaginary cylinder is touched by a player (from either team), or if the ball is touching any part of the basket and a player touches any part of the basket (i.e. ball touching the rim and a player touches the net, ring, flange, etc.), or a player reaches through the basket from below and touches the ball before it enters the cylinder. Therefore, the act of slapping the backboard has nothing to do with goaltending or basket interference. It is either a technical foul or its nothing.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This was just a test to see why I couldn't use this board

[This message has been edited by mick (edited August 07, 2000).]