When a T hurts the official

[Nevadaref]

With 4 seconds left, team B, trailing by 1, is inbounding on the opponent's endline. They have to go 84 feet to score, until....
The defender guarding the inbounds reaches across the plane and hits the ball while it is still in the thrower's hands.
Whack. They make one of two and miss after inbounding at midcourt. The game goes double OT. Serves me right for calling that.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
With 4 seconds left, team B, trailing by 1, is inbounding on the opponent's endline. They have to go 84 feet to score, until....
The defender guarding the inbounds reaches across the plane and hits the ball while it is still in the thrower's hands.
Whack. They make one of two and miss after inbounding at midcourt. The game goes double OT. Serves me right for calling that.

Unfortunately,you didn't really have a choice,did ya? This one is sraight out of casebook play 9.2.11. You did the only thing that you could do in this situation.If you don't call the T,you're screwing the team that had the ball OOB for the throw-in.

Good job,Nevada!

[mick]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
With 4 seconds left, team B, trailing by 1, is inbounding on the opponent's endline. They have to go 84 feet to score, until....
The defender guarding the inbounds reaches across the plane and hits the ball while it is still in the thrower's hands.
Whack. They make one of two and miss after inbounding at midcourt. The game goes double OT. Serves me right for calling that.

That took cajones.
Udaman!

[Nevadaref]

Thanks for the support, guys. It wasn't a popular call at all. This was a championship game that determined which team qualified for some national AAU tournament. The T was against the local team in a packed gym and they eventually lost in 2OT.
And JR, you are right that I had no choice. The hitting of the ball clearly disadvantaged the thrower who was trying to make a pass at that moment. I didn't hesitate. As for my joking complaint about the double OT: sometimes you have to work a little harder to do it right.

[JRutledge]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Thanks for the support, guys. It wasn't a popular call at all. This was a championship game that determined which team qualified for some national AAU tournament. The T was against the local team in a packed gym and they eventually lost in 2OT.
And JR, you are right that I had no choice. The hitting of the ball clearly disadvantaged the thrower who was trying to make a pass at that moment. I didn't hesitate. As for my joking complaint about the double OT: sometimes you have to work a little harder to do it right.

I commend you for doing it right. Many officials would have taken the easy way out. You did exactly what the ruling suggest, took some courage on your part.

Peace

[Hawks Coach]

We had a qualifier game this weekend, game is tight and we are down a couple. We always, and I mean ALWAYS, break on a made shot (even if my rivals read this, they should know it by now!). We practice the three step move OOB and try to inbound between the hash mark and half court if they allow it, with the next pass into the front court and we are on offense.

Opponent makes shot, one of their players grabs the ball and holds it a bit while her team gets back, then tosses it OOB for our player to get. Ref blows whistle and warns her and warns the bench saying next one is a T. Very next possession, same girl does same thing (playing defense would have helped I will admit!). Ref blows whistle and says last warning coach.

You have to make these calls or the game is fundamentally altered.

[wizard]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
We had a qualifier game this weekend, game is tight and we are down a couple. We always, and I mean ALWAYS, break on a made shot (even if my rivals read this, they should know it by now!). We practice the three step move OOB and try to inbound between the hash mark and half court if they allow it, with the next pass into the front court and we are on offense.

Opponent makes shot, one of their players grabs the ball and holds it a bit while her team gets back, then tosses it OOB for our player to get. Ref blows whistle and warns her and warns the bench saying next one is a T. Very next possession, same girl does same thing (playing defense would have helped I will admit!). Ref blows whistle and says last warning coach.

You have to make these calls or the game is fundamentally altered.

How old are these girls? Did the "delay of gamer" look like she was lost?

I agree. If you give the "next time" warning, you gotta follow through.

[Hawks Coach]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by wizard

How old are these girls? Did the "delay of gamer" look like she was lost?

I agree. If you give the "next time" warning, you gotta follow through.

13U AAU Regional (qualifier for Nationals). These girls play 80 games a year of up tempo ball. I don't know that there was intent to delay, but at this age and skill level, that is really kind of irrelevant. No "next time" warning required - you blow the whistle, it needs to be an official warning and next one needs to be a T, especially in a tourney that counts for going to Nationals (good thing we won anyway!).

Three years ago (coaching the same team I have now as 10Us) I had a player disqualified for violating the boundary plane on 3 different occasions during one game, and it wasn't even a game that counted for anything. Warning, T, T, see ya. That's the rules.

[wizard]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Three years ago (coaching the same team I have now as 10Us) I had a player disqualified for violating the boundary plane on 3 different occasions during one game, and it wasn't even a game that counted for anything. Warning, T, T, see ya. That's the rules.

THREE TIMES? Every player I've every warned never came close again. They usually get the point. Your player must love to play defense!

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
I had a player disqualified for violating the boundary plane on 3 different occasions during one game, and it wasn't even a game that counted for anything. Warning, T, T, see ya. That's the rules.

Ouch!! That's NOT the rules. Yes, it's a T, but it's charged only to the team for delay. It's not charged directly to either the player or the coach. 10-1-5d (FED)

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Ouch!! That's NOT the rules. Yes, it's a T, but it's charged only to the team for delay. It's not charged directly to either the player or the coach. 10-1-5d (FED)

Unless she touches the ball and then it is charged to her.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Unless she touches the ball and then it is charged to her

Yes, but in the original situation, Coach said only that she broke the plane, so that's what I based my comment on. You are correct that touching the BALL while still in the hands of the thrower is a player technical. (10-3-12, FED)

[Hawks Coach]

Chuck, you are correct that I said she only broke the plane, which was indeed the case. And I had not noted the distinction pointed out by Nevada in the rules, so that was an excellent point to make as well even if it did not directly bear on my situation. I had always read the rule in 10-3-7 (d) to apply to the boundary plane violation, but that is not the case.

Rule 10, SECTION 3 PLAYER TECHNICAL
A player shall not:
ART. 7 . . . Delay the game by acts such as:
d. Repeated violations of the throw-in, as in 9-2-9, 10.

Upon further review, 10-3-7 only applies to the offensive team violations on throw-ins, though it is not clear why the offense committing a violation that costs them the ball can be a technical if they repeatedly make the error. This rule is under delay, but you may as well penalize a person for repeatedly travelling as a delay.

Why is the turnover not enough for these violations? And how many violations constitute "repeated" in this rule?

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
Chuck, you are correct that I said she only broke the plane, which was indeed the case. And I had not noted the distinction pointed out by Nevada in the rules, so that was an excellent point to make as well even if it did not directly bear on my situation. I had always read the rule in 10-3-7 (d) to apply to the boundary plane violation, but that is not the case.

Rule 10, SECTION 3 PLAYER TECHNICAL
A player shall not:
ART. 7 . . . Delay the game by acts such as:
d. Repeated violations of the throw-in, as in 9-2-9, 10.

Upon further review, 10-3-7 only applies to the offensive team violations on throw-ins, though it is not clear why the offense committing a violation that costs them the ball can be a technical if they repeatedly make the error. This rule is under delay, but you may as well penalize a person for repeatedly travelling as a delay.

Why is the turnover not enough for these violations? And how many violations constitute "repeated" in this rule?

Ok Coach, your team is down by 10 with five seconds left and the other team only has one player left, how do you keep from losing? Simple: call time-out and when you return from the TO you simply violate on the throw-in so that the clock will not start. Now the other team gets the throw-in opportunity, but since we know that it is a violation to be the first to touch your own throw-in pass the only way this single remaining player can get the clock started is to hit one of your players with the ball. You instruct your team to run to the far end of the court and play dodge ball. Now after your opponent commits a throw-in violation, you proceed to violate again with the idea of continually repeating the process! See the problem? Of course, a T won't get the clock started either, but if you make a travesty of the game by getting a few T's, then you would forfeit. I would say three repeated violations of the throw-in is a T.

[Hawks Coach]

Nevada
Your example is perfectly valid, but not a common enough situation that would justify this specific provision in the rules. I find it hard to accept that this specific of a rule was written with your situation in mind. Furthermore, I could simply throw the ball in such a way that it isn't touched (or touchable by my single opponent) and achieve the same result - and that is not referenced in the T rule.

Your example represents one very bizarre and not commonly found or anticipated situation. I would like to see something a little more like what happens in a normal game that shows why such a specific rule on these violations is required.