Another episode of "T or No T"...you make the call
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/TDswWKykXso?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That's quite the pullup.

He must have a bigger set of guns than Brittney Griner.

I think he hits the backboard with his hip.

I have nothing here. Every time a player goes up on the rim is not a T in my book, even if it is sometimes exaggerated.

Peace

I agree. Exaggerated is a good word here, but the action is kind of in context to a follow through on the dunk itself, as opposed to a chin-up afterward.

I've got nada.

Me either.

Forget the T, did he travel on his way to the basket? I couldn't tell if he dribbled or not.

He did. It's tough to see it but you can hear the ball hit the court when he dribbles.

Wow....I don't think I've seen many chin-ups higher than that....he pulled up so far that his head was above the level of the rim.

That is a T just about any way you cut it.

Whack!

I have a T, as well. It appears to me the divide here depends greatly upon what our respective superviors tell us.

Wow...that was pretty high. My first instinct is that I would have left it alone. It almost appears his momentum carried his head over the rim but I don't think that's possible. He doesn't appear to hang...lets go immediately. So fast...no real showmanship other than the dunk itself...play on...but I see the point of those that vote for T being served.

Nada here.

Wow ...
 

He didn't jump that high with only his legs. He pulled himself up, in my opinion, unnecessarily, not to prevent an injury. Showoff. Technical foul.

They must not have very athletic players in your neck of the woods. ;)

Peace

He accelerates upwards after his hands grab the rim. That's a pull-up, IMO. Whether it's called is obviously up to your powers that be.

I acknowledge that my point of view is partially shaped by being a football official first (12 years) and a basketball official second (2 years), but I don't at all understand why anyone would call this a technical. There's no taunting. No yelling. No delay. The kid dunked and started getting back on defense.

If you have to split hairs about the degree to which a kid pulls his arms up, then--to me, at least--you're not even in the neighborhood for a T.

I'm not trying to be argumentative. And not trying to disparage those who think it's T-worthy.

But philosophy-wise, I just think T's need to "be there." Put another way, if reasonable officials would debate it, then that's probably an indication that there's not enough there.

+1

A heck of an athletic play.

Otherwise, nothing.

The point is that grabbing the rim beyond what is necessary to make the shot/dunk is not legal. That act itself is the taunt.

If you want to propose that pulling up on the rim be legal, then suggest a rule change.

I don't think he's proposing anything...just that if we're debating, it's probably marginal, so leave it alone. I tend to agree.

I think it depends how often officials see dunks in their games, too. Personally, I probably see more than some, less than others, but I didn't even blink on this one. No way I'd call a technical here.

Very well. This isn't about unsportsmanlike conduct at all. Often times, people think technical fouls are always about unsportsmanlike conduct, and that's not the case.

See NFHS 10-3-3. This is about grasping the ring. If you pull yourself up on the ring, that's clearly grasping. A quick grasp without hanging is one thing. This is the other side of that bell-shaped curve. We've been told a number of times that grasping the ring is a safety issue, let alone the possibility of breaking the backboard (which can still happen, despite advances in breakaway rims). Wasn't this rule put in place to make sure we can finish the game with two working goals?

I think GroupThink has a point, though. The more often kids can throw it down in your area, the more leeway you're likely to see. There's not a lot of above the rim play in my little corner of the nation. However, the official in the video knew this game was nationally televised, and the kids were there to show off their skills to college scouts. If that's how he was told to officiate, then we're back to Roman Law again.

Nothing. The momentum of his jump has him going away from the basket and he grabs the rim to steady himself.

I don't think I'd have called the T, but I don't buy that he's steadying himself. He's pulling himself up to get an extra couple of feet on the jump.

You Talkin' To Me ???
 

Reasonable officials? On the Forum? You have got to be kidding? Right?

This is not a T. The legs coming up as they did was part of the jumping action for the dunk. His twist isn't a foul either.

Great way of putting it. I agree. Get the obvious.

And this was.

Is this a real game or a showcase?

It's the "national championship" of non-sanctioned high school teams. These teams play against some regular public schools during the course of the season but also travel extensively and don't have state imposed restrictions. Some of the teams may also have kids who have already graduated high school and are doing a year of prep school before going to college.

Ahhh ~ tough to call this a T in a game of that magnitude... easy play-on in a showcase setting.

Showcase, sure. Magnitude? Nah.

Snaqs, you dont think it would be tough to whack him after that highlight play in a National C'Ship setting?
Keep in mind "tough" doesnt mean I wont call it. Afterall, tough calls are what we get paid for.

FTR, I thought it was a bit over the top for any sanctioned game, but I'd really like to see what other similar acts were passed on prior to this one.
A T here may not fit this particular situation.

Why call a technical on that play. If you called a technical on that play at that point in the game it tells me, that you are not use to that type of above the rim play......

That is just an every day play along the I - 95 corridor......

You mean you have to be used to infractions to ignore them? :eek:

Just sayin brother that I think that is a misdemeanor and not a felony........:D

+1

I see quite a bit of above the rim play at multiple levels, in a few States during the season. In my experiences, when their head is that high above the rim its usually before they dunk NOT after the dunk when they should be coming down. JMO

WHS^^^^^^^

Its is a specific rule that was violated. Not a judgement call unless you think he was protecting himself. He has a clear landing area with no players around him. I don't see the need for him to protect himself, so WHACK!

It still is a judgement call...heck half of the people replying said this is nothing, so that should tell you it isn't as clear as you're making it out to be.

How is is not a judgment call? Because you say so? Sorry, but I think the players great play to contort himself in a way to be on the other side of the basket. Sorry, still a judgment call even if you disagree with the way it was called.

Peace

I agree, but let's not pretend his upward motion after the dunk is due to his jump. Let's not pretend he didn't pull himself up an extra foot or two using the rim; the acceleration upwards is clear to me.

I probably wouldn't have called it in this showcase game, but it's still a spade.

Concur. I was taught that players will rise UP to throw it down, not the other way around.

Obvious? It seems we have three pages of posts that do not all agree. That doesn't seem obvious.

The action was obvious, I don't see anyone disputing that. Some are just saying they wouldn't call it a T.

Unless he has springs in his fingers.

But the obvious illegal action still boils down to the judgment of the floor officials. To pull the trigger or not to pull the trigger??

Now we're getting to a different philosophical question. Are there contexts in which there's an 'obvious' rule violation and you're not blowing your whistle? I think we'd all have to agree that there are. Is the violation in this video obvious? I think it is pretty hard to make a case to the contrary. But if I was in the moment, I probably would have had nothing.

Those that are saying no T are doing so by applying a qualifier to the rule that doesn't exist.....that he didn't grasp the rim too much. But, the rule doesn't consider how much....just whether he did or did not.

That said, and even in spite of my prior comments, I may or may not call it depending on the overall situation...yeah, I did say that. :p

No one is qualifying anything any more than those that think this is a "no-brainer" T either. Because I have not seen any interpretation that says clearly what is or what is not a hanging on the rim dunk under the NF rules. And certainly not anything that shows what is or is not on video. So what I think it comes down to how much someone actually sees dunking in their game. I could find much more suspect dunks than this one and this was not even close to those that are not even called a T. Again, there is a reason why some guys get questioned for their ability to call certain things and this being a "no-brainer" T would suggest something about those saying that. There is clearly a debate to be had, but let us not act like one side is so much right and the other side is so wrong.

Peace

Don't you have to add that qualifier though to properly judge plays? If we went just by the strict wording of the rule, any grasp of the rim would be a T no matter how short(not including injury prevention). Do you think the Brittney Griner dunk should have been a T?

Whether the rule says explicitly or not, we add that qualifier as to how we judge the play IMO.

By rule, no. Did they grab the rim or not? It is a simple question. That is all the rule requires us to judge....not was it too long. Unless it is for safety, the rules say it is a T if a player grasps the rim.

Just because minor occurrences of grasping the rim are often not called doesn't mean it is actually legal any more than uncalled travels are.

In my opinion, if the grabbing of the rim is used to raise the body, it is a T....and I've seen more than enough to tell when a the effects on the player's body are from just making the dunk vs. unnecessarily raising the body.

And in this specific case, the player used the rim to lift himself high enough to get his head above the rim....I've never seen a dunk where a player's head gets that high after the dunk without grabbing the rim....they may be near that high before the dunk but they don't start to come down and go back up without some extra help.

Now, in a game, I might not always call it. It depends on the game....certainly not in the Griner case, even if I felt she violated the letter of the rule. It would have simply been wrong to call something on that.

A Micki King maneuver
 

I don't think the mere act of pulling one's self up after a dunk is a T, they have to land after taking their momentum to the hoop and I don't think fear of the other team getting two and the ball ought to be a factor in doing a pull-up motion to stop the momentum and allow a straight drop to the floor. Didn't any of you people ever climb trees as a kid? Two hundred something bounds on an ankle or knee the wrong way ends seasons and careers.

I also don't think it matters that there are no bodies below the shooter; one can land just as badly on an open court as on another person.

However, a one-and-a-half gainer after the shot is pure gymnastics, intended to call attention to himself and for no other reason and deserved a T.

Correct, it doesn't. The rule allows a player to grasp the ring to avoid injury. But as others have said, I don't think the kid was grasping the ring to avoid injury. This looked like more of a "flourish" at the end of the move. As MTDS and others have pointed out, the kid's head went higher after he put the ball through and the only way that happens is by pulling himself up.

If I'd called a T in that spot my reaction to the complaints of the coach would've been "Coach, did he need to do what he did to protect himself or actually make the shot?"

Ding, Ding, Ding this is the winner for me.
He is going under the rim, during the jump he rotates his body 180 degrees from his original direction. When he dunks his hips and legs are not yet vertical under his upper torso. The grasp and pull, brings his body vertical he then lets go and returns to the floor. Nothing other than insuring his ability to land safely.

I watched this clip, read all the interesting comments, and watched the dunk several more times. I have nothing.

I am not tall enough to do this, but when I was a youngster in the motherland (Indiana) we often played on lowered rims. I know this may be too much in the weeds, but I think there are a few things to consider. First, where he dunks the ball on the rim has less give than if he dunked the ball in front. The force of the dunk itself is going to cause him to go up. I just don't think he can dunk the ball with force and avoid this. Second, the move itself is something I looked at. If he dunked and didn't grab the rim as much, his momentum would have likely kept him moving parallel to the end line and he may have landed on his back since his feet were not under him. I think this is what BNR was referring to.

I have to say that having done something similar myself, even on a much lower rim, I understand why he did what he did. I just don't see a T here.

For those who do have a T, do you think there were any plays in the championship game last night worthy of a T for hanging on the rim? I don't remember the time or the team, but there was one play - on the right of the screen as I was watching at home - that should have been a T. What do you think?

Perhaps. I think each level of game gets a slightly different threshold of what it takes to make a T. In a HS game (like the one being discussed through the thread), the threshold is lower. In a college game, the threshold is higher. In the NBA, it is even higher. Same rule, just different levels of acceptable actions. The OP was a HS game.

In the situation you refer to in the championship game (from memory) the player did grab the rim but only did so until he stabilized and dropped. Unlike the player in the OP, he didn't yank himself up a foot or more higher than he needed to do.

I can understand what you are saying Camron, but I don't agree with what you are saying about the NBA threshold. Some things in the NBA are dealt with much quicker/better than other levels. Either players hang on the rim - on national TV - more than college or the NBA officials are less hesitant to call it. Either NBA players hand check more than college players or the NBA officials are less hesitant to call it. JMO

Admittedly, I don't spend a lot of time watching the NBA so you're probably right. I was just extrapolating based on some limited observations of what I've seen in the NBA in the past.

Exactly. I am also not a big NBA fan/watcher, but when I do, they call their directives much more consistently than any NCAA game I see. I saw things last night I felt should have been called that if these were NBA officials, would have been called.

Peace

Misty Water Colored Memories ...
 

I believe that this used to matter, maybe twenty-five, or thirty, years ago, but it doesn't matter anymore.