DoG on Inbound throw-in

[stripes]

Originally Posted by BigT

In 1k games my first 2.5 years of officiating I have called 20 DoG for kids reaching heavily through the inbound plane after trying to talk them back. I have also watched a lot of games. My partners and in those other games I have only seen this DoG called a few times. My personality is this gives the defense an advantage and well they aren't heading the warning and to actually call it.

I am beginning to wonder if a lot of officials let them get away with moderate infringement because they dont want to have to stop the game and go over and report it because it seems embarrassing or not not severe enough to stop a game.

I dont want to slow my climb up the ladder by being to picky on this call and the one where kids hit the line on free throw attempts.

I need some advice and look forward to it today. Thanks in advance.

Big T, in my 19 years of officiating (mostly in the SLC area), I haven't called this anywhere near 20 times. Talk them out of the DoG and call only what you HAVE to.

Remember, when in Rome...

Don't stand out for the wrong reason.

[Sharpshooternes]

So just a couple questions for us newer officials.
Who shoots the technical or intentional free throws after contact of the ball/player OOB? The player or the team? Does it matter in this case whether it is INT or Tech?

Next question, after the shooting of the FTs, where is the ball inbounded?
Specifically from this scenario: Team A is inbounding under their own basket. B1 breaks the plane and strikes the ball while stil in A1s hand. Technical foul is called. Seems like a disadvantage to me to have A inbound the ball form half court whenthey had it under the basket to start with.
Thanks

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So just a couple questions for us newer officials.
Who shoots the technical or intentional free throws after contact of the ball/player OOB? The player or the team? Does it matter in this case whether it is INT or Tech?

The rule does not change for this situation, it is just like any other situations. Intentional Fouls are always shot by the person fouled unless injured or disqualified for some reason. Technical Fouls are always shot by anyone that is available on the team to shoot the FTs.

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

Next question, after the shooting of the FTs, where is the ball inbounded?
Specifically from this scenario: Team A is inbounding under their own basket. B1 breaks the plane and strikes the ball while stil in A1s hand. Technical foul is called. Seems like a disadvantage to me to have A inbound the ball form half court whenthey had it under the basket to start with.
Thanks

Again, what does the rule say? Who cares what it might be more advantageous or what is fair? All Technical Fouls throw-ins are administered at the division line, opposite the table. Is it advantageous to now have another Technical Foul of any kind now will disqualify a player or coach from the game? It does not matter what is more advantageous you or I think, the rule is the rule for a reason. At least an Intentional Foul is just like another foul.

Peace

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The rule does not change for this situation, it is just like any other situations. Intentional Fouls are always shot by the person fouled unless injured or disqualified for some reason. Technical Fouls are always shot by anyone that is available on the team to shoot the FTs.



Again, what does the rule say? Who cares what it might be more advantageous or what is fair? All Technical Fouls throw-ins are administered at the division line, opposite the table. Is it advantageous to now have another Technical Foul of any kind now will disqualify a player or coach from the game? It does not matter what is more advantageous you or I think, the rule is the rule for a reason. At least an Intentional Foul is just like another foul.

Peace

That is prety much what I thought. Just wanted verification. Thanks again.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

That is prety much what I thought. Just wanted verification. Thanks again.

Moral of the story, do not overthink rules. Most rules are pretty simple if you actually think of them through. And it is rather basic what we do in IF and TF situations if you just take a breathe and think of what you do.

Now this should not be a rule you ever screw up.

Peace