You Make The Call

[APG]

This occurred yesterday afternoon.

[berserkBBK]

I am not a fan of Matt Barnes and it is stupid that he is even up by the rim on this, but I have nothing, although it is about as close as you can make it. He doesn't touch the ball. The ball is already through the rim and is still in the net (still part of the basket), but it doesn't affect the play. On the court without having a replay I may have called it as it was really, really close.

What were they doing at the monitor?

[APG]

Originally Posted by berserkBBK

I am not a fan of Matt Barnes and it is stupid that he is even up by the rim on this, but I have nothing, although it is about as close as you can make it. He doesn't touch the ball. The ball is already through the rim and is still in the net (still part of the basket), but it doesn't affect the play. On the court without having a replay I may have called it as it was really, really close.

What were they doing at the monitor?

I also don't think he touched the ball...but someone might make a case that the player grasped the rim while the ball was in the basket. Still I wouldn't have a call on this either.

That review took place during a timeout...they were reviewing whether it was a 2 v. 3.

[Camron Rust]

If you're splitting hairs, that is BI. I think he touched the top of the ball as it was passing below the level of the rim. Even if he didn't he was in contact with the rim with the ball still in the basket.

It may not have had any effect on whether the shot went in, but that is not part of the BI rule. If the defense had gone up and touched the rim in a way that couldn't affect the shot, then the shot falls off, well still call it.

But, as I said, we're splitting hairs here....it was clearly close and, on the court, I'd probably have nothing on such a play more often I'd have something.

[berserkBBK]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If you're splitting hairs, that is BI. I think he touched the top of the ball as it was passing below the level of the rim. Even if he didn't he was in contact with the rim with the ball still in the basket.

It may not have had any effect on whether the shot went in, but that is not part of the BI rule. If the defense had gone up and touched the rim in a way that couldn't affect the shot, then the shot falls off, well still call it.

But, as I said, we're splitting hairs here....it was clearly close and, on the court, I'd probably have nothing on such a play more often I'd have something.

You're right. Saying didn't affect the shot is the wrong thing to say. I guess just having the ball at the bottom of the net is too nit picky for me to call it. I didn't see the ball get hit in the basket, but so close maybe it did. Such a weird play.

[JRutledge]

I think he touched it as well, but I think it was so slight that you cannot see it in real time. He should not have been up there, but I have no problem with nothing called there.

Peace

[Toren]

I had a BI in real time. I hope I would have called it.

[Adam]

If they'd call this, they'd stop doing it. Not that a no-call is horrible here, as it's pretty danged close. Still....

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If they'd call this, they'd stop doing it. Not that a no-call is horrible here, as it's pretty danged close. Still....

Maybe in our games that would fly over, but what if you are at that level with super slow motion replay and it shows he clearly did not touch the ball? Then the officials would be ripped apart for some time and it would be seen as worse if this helped "decide the game." I think that goes into their thinking that most of us do not have the the privilege to even think about.

Peace

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Maybe in our games that would fly over, but what if you are at that level with super slow motion replay and it shows he clearly did not touch the ball? Then the officials would be ripped apart for some time and it would be seen as worse if this helped "decide the game." I think that goes into their thinking that most of us do not have the the privilege to even think about.

Peace

My understanding is those guys get stung equally for incorrect calls and incorrect no-calls.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

My understanding is those guys get stung equally for incorrect calls and incorrect no-calls.

You are right, they do get pointed out for correct and incorrect calls. But something tells me this would not be one of those calls that would be considered that overwhelmingly wrong.

Peace

[rockyroad]

I honestly think that if I saw this play while officiating the game, I would think it was a variation on an "alley oop" pass and think "Wow. Nice dunk." I don't think Offensive BI would even enter my mind. Of course, I would only count it as a 2, not a 3...but that's why I'm not working those games!

[Nevadaref]

He touches the ball on the downward flight and helps guide it into the basket. That's illegal at the NFHS and NCAA levels. Bentaylor will probably be along to tell us that the NBA has an exception for the momentum of a jumping player though.

[Nevadaref]

This is a missed call, but the speed at which it happens makes it understandable. The officials need to be certain in order to put a whistle on this, especially late in a close game.

[JetMetFan]

Rule 11
Section I-A Player Shall Not:
a. Touch the ball or the basket ring when the ball is using the basket ring as its lower base.
EXCEPTION: If a player near his own basket has his hand legally in contact with the ball, it is not a violation if his contact with the ball continues after the ball enters the cylinder, or if, in such action, he touches the basket.
b. Touch the ball when it is above the basket ring and within the imaginary cylinder.
g. Touch any live ball from within the playing area that is on its downward flight with an opportunity to touch the basket ring. This is considered to be a "field goal attempt" or trying for a goal.
h. Touch the ball at any time with a hand which is through the basket ring.

The exception is what permits players to dunk.