Delay warnings
 

I'd like to get some input regarding warning a player about catching the ball, touching the ball, after a goal scored by that player's team. I have been of the mindset to stop the action, early in a game.
For example, in a recent HSV Boys tornament, stud player A1, a D1 signee, insisted on catching the ball after a flush, or put-back, and then he would toss the ball to an opponent. I saw his actions as an intimidation towards his opponents. However, some of my colleagues have been somewhat critical, saying that I'm too tight on warning against such action.
4-47-3, and 10-1-5e are the rules citations. Casebook 10.1.5 Sit D covers the interfering, "slapping away" of the ball.
How do you guys handle such actions?

If the player is in a position to rebound, they often catch the ball as an instinct even though the basket is made. That (generally) doesn't warrant a delay warning.

If the other team isn't looking to run, and if that player's team isn't looking to set up the press, that (generally) doesn't warrant a delay warning.

If you think it might lead to a problem later, talk to the player ("hey -- let it go") on the trip up the floor or at the next stoppage.

+ 1 Intent & Purpose

The warning is for delaying the ensuing throw-in not for touching, catching or my personal fav tossing the ball to the endline official.

Although not my "personal fav" (that would be Teri Hatcher), I get a kick out of it when a member of the team that's going to inbound grabs the ball after it went through the other team's basket and tosses it to me. I jump out of the way and loudly start my five second count while using a visible count. They usually get the message pretty quick. Sometimes the look on their face is almost priceless.

-1

I'd put this as high on the list of "ways to ruin a game." Just bat / pass the ball back to the player. If needed, tell him / her that they don't need to pass the ball to you in this situation.

That'll teach them. :confused:

Or you could...you know, catch the ball and bat it back. If for some reason this is a big deal to you, bat it back, then tell them to knock it off so it doesn't happen again.

I like the Intent & Purpose reasoning however in the FIBA game under 38.3.1 deals with this action directly.

"Delaying the game by deliberately touch the ball after it passes through the basket or preventing a throw-in from being taken promptly." = Technical Foul.

We've been instructed to 1st warn, which includes all team members of the offending team, then apply the Technical Foul rule on the 2nd occurance.

Maybe it's just my "charming" personality but I have yet to assess a technical foul for this infraction. Lots of warnings but no "T" yet... :rolleyes:

Can you show us that
 

What does a loud visible count look like?

How would I know? That's not what I said I do. Read it again. I said "I jump out of the way and loudly start my five second count while using a visible count. The "five second count" and "visible count" are stated as two things.

-1, me too.

Just give them the ball. Some young players just don't know what they are doing.

...and Teri Hatcher needs a sammich and piece of cake; way too skinny.

Okay...I was picturing it as something akin to Leslie Nielsen's performance as a home plate umpire. Guess I was wrong.

Twists And Turns ???
 

With the new 2011-12 NFHS clarification that when an opponent contacts the inbounder, and if a part of the inbounder's arms are inbounds, that an intentional foul shall be charged to the offender; does the offending team receive an "automatic" delay of game warning as we did in the past when we called intentional fouls when the defender crossed the boundary and fouled the inbounder?

Why would they? The delay warning is for crossing the throw-in plane.

Of course, so was the intentional foul (of course, that was another interpretation that has absolutely no rules backing).

Intentional Foul ???
 

That's why I asked. "Intentionally" fouling the inbounder delays the game, whether, or not, the defender crosses the plane. I was just wondering if the "intentional" foul penalty interpretation "carried" over to the new interpretation. I don't think it should, but we've seen odder interpretations, haven't we?