So folks, did the crew miss something on this one?

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Yes, I am. Film don't lie.

oook, I always wondered why they misnamed this violation basket interference.

[APG]

Originally Posted by BLydic

oook, I always wondered why they misnamed this violation basket interference.

Are you wondering why it's this particular instance is still called basket interference? If so, because by definition, the the rim, flange, and net are considered part of the basket.

Now by rule is the above play basket interference? Sure it is...but I'm not sure this particular play was the intent of the rule.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Are you wondering why it's this particular instance is still called basket interference? If so, because by definition, the the rim, flange, and net are considered part of the basket.

Now by rule is the above play basket interference? Sure it is...but I'm not sure this particular play was the intent of the rule.

I'm sure it wasn't, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to pick the nit. OTOH, I've had the defense do it and I haven't stopped the game and just allowed the basket to count.

The one time I called this in the past 2 years, the ball came halfway out above the rim, so it was pretty much a no-brainer.

And yet...there it is on film for everyone to see. To be honest, it might trip my trigger in the moment or it might not. Probably depends on what happens to the ball.

How's that for wishy-washy?

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I'm sure it wasn't, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to pick the nit. OTOH, I've had the defense do it and I haven't stopped the game and just allowed the basket to count.

The one time I called this in the past 2 years, the ball came halfway out above the rim, so it was pretty much a no-brainer.

And yet...there it is on film for everyone to see. To be honest, it might trip my trigger in the moment or it might not. Probably depends on what happens to the ball.

How's that for wishy-washy?

If it wasn't the intent of the rule, which you're sure it wasn't, then there's really no nit to pick, is there? Your real world examples still haven't convinced me that BI is the correct call on the play in the OP's video.

[Sharpshooternes]

Just making sure I understand this. It seems the general consensus is that the player touched the net before the ball was completely through the hoop. If the ball is still in the net, that is ok but if any part is still in the ring it is BI. Is that about right? No one feels like the ball was all the way down before he touched the net?

[APG]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

Just making sure I understand this. It seems the general consensus is that the player touched the net before the ball was completely through the hoop. If the ball is still in the net, that is ok but if any part is still in the ring it is BI. Is that about right? No one feels like the ball was all the way down before he touched the net?

Rule 4, SECTION 6 BASKET INTERFERENCE
Basket interference occurs when a player:

ART. 1 . . . Touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket.

The net was touched while the ball was within the basket. Technically, by rule, this is basket interference.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Rule 4, SECTION 6 BASKET INTERFERENCE
Basket interference occurs when a player:

ART. 1 . . . Touches the ball or any part of the basket (including the net) while the ball is on or within either basket.

The net was touched while the ball was within the basket. Technically, by rule, this is basket interference.

Not only was the net touched, it appears like the ball was touched.

It is certainly not impossible for such contact to affect the shot....I know I've seen a few that appeared to have been in yet popped back out.

[Toren]

BI and yes I'm calling it. The ball changes direction as a result of the contact with the net, so either the hand also hit the ball or the result of the net grab lead to the ball being moved.

So stop being an idiot and stay off my net.

[just another ref]

To each his own. Some guys don't call 3 seconds. I wouldn't call this.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

What's the difference between calling/not calling this one?

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

The intent of the rule.

Originally Posted by BLydic

The intent.

Originally Posted by BLydic

Intent of the rule.

"It is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may
be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be
permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be
permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not
intended by a rule."

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

"It is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may
be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be
permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be
permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not
intended by a rule."

As I continue to be a gremlin...

So what, then, is the intent and purpose of this rule?

I wouldn't have posted the video if the kid had only swiped the net. To me that would be nitpicking. It's the contact with the ball which made me think this would be a good one for discussion.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

So what, then, is the intent and purpose of this rule?

To prevent players from interfering with the ball, or the basket, in situations where such interference would illegally cause the ball to go in the basket, or where such interference would illegally prevent to the ball from going in the basket.

[fullor30]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

I'm sure it wasn't, but I'm not sure I'm prepared to pick the nit. OTOH, I've had the defense do it and I haven't stopped the game and just allowed the basket to count.

The one time I called this in the past 2 years, the ball came halfway out above the rim, so it was pretty much a no-brainer.

And yet...there it is on film for everyone to see. To be honest, it might trip my trigger in the moment or it might not. Probably depends on what happens to the ball.

How's that for wishy-washy?

I disagree........... well, not really

[BLydic]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Are you wondering why it's this particular instance is still called basket interference? If so, because by definition, the the rim, flange, and net are considered part of the basket.

Now by rule is the above play basket interference? Sure it is...but I'm not sure this particular play was the intent of the rule.

No, I know the rule and understand completely what constitutes "the basket".

I agree, by a very strict reading of the rule, this is BI. However, I feel pretty confident it doesn't fit the intent.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by BLydic

No, I know the rule and understand completely what constitutes "the basket".

I agree, by a very strict reading of the rule, this is BI. However, I feel pretty confident it doesn't fit the intent.

I've seen a basketball go this far into the net, hit the tight part just right (wrong?) and come right back out --- no basket. The player committing the BI here prevented that possibility. It's not a bucket until it comes out the bottom. Period.