2 Different Rules Questions
 

Was working a Men's JUCO game last night and these two scenarios came up:

1st Play

WHITE is shooting the 1st shot of a 1 and 1. Shot goes up, we have a foul on a push on WHITE for shoving a BLUE team member completely under the goal and the BLUE team is also in the bonus. Shot goes in. We handled it like this:

Counted the basket, reported the foul on WHITE. WHITE then shot the 2nd free throw of the bonus with the lane cleared. We then went to the other end where BLUE would attempt their 1 and 1 with everyone on the lane line and it will be a live ball on the first shot. Did we do this correctly? We were thinking that's the only way we could of done it, but I'm sure there is something we were missing.

2nd Play

BLUE has the ball for a throw in after a made basket. They throw the ball in and the official begins his 10 second count. On a pass, the ball is deflected by the WHITE team and its now rolling on the floor but WHITE has not gained team control so the official continues his 10 second count as a tipped pass does not negate team control. During the attempt to get the ball, a WHITE team member is on the floor going after the ball and a BLUE team member now goes through the kid on the floor to get the ball. We doubled up on the whistle as it was an easy foul. I was thinking that BLUE still had team control since the official still has a 10 count, other 2 partners were thinking that there is no team control so we shot the free throws because white was in the bonus.

Let me know how you would rule on this. I'm saying, by rule, since the 10 second count was still going that there is still team control, and therefor the foul on BLUE should of been a team control foul and WHITE should of been awarded the ball at the nearest spot on the floor.

Any help would be appreciated. Thanks! If you have any rule references or case book plays in the NCAA books that would be great

Poor grammar aside, you were correct in both cases.

I will say that you reasoning in the second is backwards, though. It's not "since there was a 10-second count, there is still team control," it's "since there was team control, there was still the 10-second count."

Et Tu, Brute?
 

:eek:

:)

Poor typing aside, ...

Poor grammar (run on sentences, incorrect words, and probably a few typos too) vs. what is probably just a typo (a single missing letter) are hardly the same thing.

Either way, who cares? What's the point of pointing out someone's poor grammar on a basketball board?

If you didn't understand what the poster was trying to say, I can understand that, but pointing out someone's poor grammar just to point it out is pretty anal and pretentious, if you ask me.

While Bob may not be known for his interpersonal skills here, I don't think he was out of line whatsoever on this thread.

Somewhere along the way, it became "rude" to correct people. The problem with that is, the whole point of correcting people is to make a change for the better. If you stay silent, you can't make a change, and the error just plain continues. Meanwhile, writing skills erode in the online world (a world that's not going away).

Bob was trying to be helpful, simulataneously in two different areas. Let's leave it at that.

If that poor grammar means someone has to read it 2-3 times just to figure out what they were trying to say, it matters. Compose questions clearly and you'll get a lot better answers. The same skills apply on the court....clear communications are valuable.

And I agree with this. But that's not what bob said. He simply pointed out that the poster has poor grammar. Not that, because of the poor grammar, he couldn't understand what the poster was trying to get at.

And I would argue that there is a time, a place and away to correct people.

Making a snide remark such as "poor grammar skills aside" is not helping to correct someone. It's a nice way of saying "your writing sucks." That's not offering any sort of help. It's just being pretentious and snobby.

Instead, maybe if bob had said something to the effect of "You know, I couldn't quite get what you were saying because you had some poor grammar, some run-on sentences, etc. If you can communicate more clearly, we'd be better able to help you out" it wouldn't have come across the way it did.

Hey fiasco, there is a space between a & way!! j/k

I feel the same way about grammar on the internet as I do about being a fashion police :D

thank You; that wuz a point i mean't to briing up butt forget too.

Nah, two different animals.

Like it or not, and regardless of whether people will admit it, you're judged on the words you use and the way you portray yourself, even online. That's why I'm a stickler to grammar in all mediums.

Fashion police? That comes down to whether the people who hired you care or not.

Exactly how much of a stickler are you? :D

While this is true, people often go overboard in terms of judging others when it comes to making sweeping generalizations about a person based solely on their grammar.

For example, I really get a kick when people I've worked with will throw out someone's resume just because there's a typo or two. Yes, let's completely disregard someone's entire work history and accomplishments because they made a grammatical mistake on a piece of paper. That's great management right there.

Likewise, I think it's pretty foolish to judge an official's ability on the court in large measure by their ability to string words together on a keyboard. It's just looking for nits to pick just to pick nits, for the most part.

Then check, check, and recheck before putting yourself out there. If you're looking to sell a product, make sure that product is shined up nicely for presentation.

By the way, none of this has anything to with our abilities on the court. This only has to do with our abilities here.

And you could say I'm a pretty good stickler, like not altering one's quote. Besides, "mediums" and "media" are both acceptable.