Inadvertent whistle
 

A1 passes ball inbounds from base line. B1 tips ball and it careens into the underside of the backboard then into A2's possession.

T whistles and call an OOB violation. L informs T that the ball only hit the underside of the backboard not the back side.

At this point the T explains that he has an inadvertent whistle and awards the ball back to A1 for a base line throw in.

Correct?
Thoughts?

That's what I would do.

On an IW the ball goes back to the team in control, so ......

It is actually called an accidental whistle. Inadvertent whistle is a football term.

With that being said, they go to the AP if he blew the whistle for a violation and the ball was not in possession. Team A would get the ball if they had the arrow. But it does not sound like that might not have been the case here.

Peace

What other options are there?

No team control during a throw-in for your games?

Why is this a question?

Does team control continue after B1 tips the ball?

The only option I can see being considered is if the whistle went while possession in bounds hadn't yet been established, which may cause someone to go with the arrow.

Right. Let's extend the play. After B1's tip, the ball bounces off the backboard and towards the division line when the officials blows the whistle.

Throw in is over. If TC is no longer in effect, you would go to the arrow.

How is TC no longer in effect?

4-12-3 Team control continues until a) a try b) an opponent secures control or c) the ball becomes dead.

Since there was no try, A has team control as it's control has not ended since it was established by the throw-in.

Check 4-36-1.

Are you sure that is the rule you want to go with?

It is better to look at 4-36-2a and even that is not what took place.

4-12-3c says team control continues until the ball becomes dead. Well the whistle makes the play dead and no one is in control of the ball.

Peace

Sorry, I was referring to "inadvertent whistle" being used as a term with that reference.

Ohh! Ohh! Ohh! I know this one!!!
 

4-36-1
Point of interruption: Method of resuming play due to officials INADVERTENT WHISTLE...

(This ruling brought to you courtesy of the 2012-13 NFHS iphone app)

You do realize that POI can be an AP application right?

Peace

The ball was still in TC, even if it wasn't in PC (or "posession.")

Use POI for an IW. Since there was TC, it goes back to A for a throw-in.

Yes. I was just confirming that the term Inadvertent Whistle was in fact a basketball term (since I have been using for many years)

I concur. The only caveat with respect to the question asked by the OP is that the throw-in for team A will be at the OOB spot nearest to where the ball was located when the whistle sounded. This may not result in a throw-in on the endline. In this instance, where the original throw-in came from is not a factor in deciding from where to award the new throw-in.

Ha! Alphabet soup!

Yes.

And, even if it didn't, in the OP team A seems to be in player control of the ball when the IW is blown, and thus has team control.

I have a 2011 NFHS rule book handy here at work. 4-36-1 says "inadvertent."

A few years back it changed to "inadvertent", but at one time it was "accidental". Not sure what year it changed, but it has changed. If you try to search accidental on the NFHS App, nothing shows up.

(EDIT: My comment below is only in reference to the point about their being team control or not, not what you do with the IW)


Is that really true now since they basically said all other rules are as they were as before on that issue where the only thing that changes is that you can have a team control foul during a throwin....which is not necessarily the same as having team control. (You can have a PC foul without PC in the case of an airborne shooter).

After B1 tips the ball and while it is rolling loose, A2 pushes B2. Do we have a Team Control foul?

Of course, but that is due to the NFHS modifying the definition of a team control foul this season as opposed to the definition of team control last season.

Camron is referring to this passage from the changes of this season:


<TABLE dir=ltr border=1 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=7 width=529><TBODY><TR><TD height=75 vAlign=top>A team-control foul is a common foul committed by a team that has team control (including a member of the throw-in team from the start of the throw-in until player control is obtained inbounds).

Rationale: The committee adopted a team-control rule change for last season which introduced some complications for a number of other rules. These complications were handled through interpretations last year. The addition of this parenthetical statement allows all rules affected by the team-control definition change last season to revert to their previous verbiage and brings the rule in line with the interpretations that were released last year.


</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Unfortunately, the NFHS did NOT change all of the affected rules back to their previous verbiage. Thus we have a situation in which we obtain different rulings by following the above guidance or what the text in the current rules book actually says. :(

Which is why I would give the ball back to the throw-in team if we have an IW instead of a foul in this situation.

Would you do that under the rules which were in place for the 2010-11 season? The definitions of player and team control were different.

I don't think retroactively :D

After doing some research this is absolutely true. They did used to only use accidental whistle previously and it appears they have corrected this in almost every example or interpretation in the rulebook and casebook.

Still with that being said I still think that you go to the AP as all the rule did was change to what we classify a foul, not what happens in the situation with the ball. And since this is not a foul situation, the team is really not in Team Control as they would not be as it relates to a back court situation either. I also cannot find a specific casebook play at this time to dispute either action. Again my rational is the ball is loose at the time of the whistle off the throw-in. It might not be fair, but that is what the rules states for this remedy at this time.

Peace

Intent and purpose of the rule. For this purpose, the team in control is the team which last had the ball, even if it is loose at the whistle. If you give a loose ball back to a team which last made any pass, I would also give it back to that team if the pass happened to be a throw-in pass.

All they wanted the rule change to do was change how a foul by the team with the throw-in was handled. What it did was give the team with the throw-in team control.

In this situation, there has not been an event which ends A's TC which started on the throw-in before the inadvertent whistle occurred.

Team A is dribbling the ball and it is knocked loose resulting in an interrupted dribble. During the interrupted dribble there is an inadvertant whistle. Team A would be awarded a throw-in due to them having team control correct? If this is correct when would we go to the arrow, only when the ball is in flight on a try?

I have read 4-36 but need help getting my mind around it.

From the time the try is released until someone secures the rebound.

If the try is good, then the POI is a throw in along the endline for B.

You would go to the AP arrow whenever there isn't team control or a try is missed.

The debate here is whether there is true TC on a throw-in or is a throw-in just a situation where a TC foul would be called but no other TC elements are applied.

What further complicates the matter is that a throw-in ends when the ball is legally touched (B1 tips throw-in) but we are told to call a TC foul up until someone secures player control.

The NFHS has made a mess of this rule. They should have just adopted the NCAA rule for Team Control and modified the 10-second, backcourt, 3-second rules to state PC must first be established.

After thinking about this, team control on a throw in only applies to fouls, so if the whistle was blown while the ball was in the air, after B1 touches, and after hitting the backboard I would go with AP, if blown while in A1 possession then go with A's ball.

Reference, please.

Everything the NFHS has distributed regarding the rule change. Of course, we won't find it in the actual rule.

They never want to do that for some reason. They always want to be cute and adopt a rule but do not want to adopt the language which would be so much easier.

Peace

Is this correct?

Yes. A gets the ball. Still have team control in an interrupted dribble.

Shouldn't they also get it in the orginal example on the throw in even though Team B tipped it due to having team control on a throw in? Or does the tip end team control bc it ends the throw-in?

By rule, TC would continue. By intent as expressed by the NFHS, it seems to be up in the air.

The team control only applies to fouls on the offense on the throw in. When it was tipped the throw in was over and there was no team control, therefore unless the whistle happened when team A had the ball, it would be an AP.

Here is another element (sorry if someone said this already), we are not going to start a 10 second back court count if either B or A touches the ball in this situation, so that is why I do not know why we automatically give the ball back to Team A if an inadvertent whistle took place and the ball was essentially loose.

Peace

This just made the light bulb come on in my head.

Yes.

That is not what the rule says. It may be the intention of the committee, but it's not the rule.

They only changed the rule for foul purposes. So we have a clear loophole or something the NF never thought about.

Peace

They only meant to change the rule for foul purposes. Because of some bad editing, they changed the rule for several other things as well.

Isn't that why I agreed with BNR that they should have adopted the NCAA rule?

And in the change they said they were to keep everything else the same but changed this rule for when to call a TC foul.

The NCAA changed the other rules to make it clear that nothing else would be the result other than a TC foul and all the other rules were changed to make exceptions for the situation.

Peace

Dang, guess I typed all this for no reason:

2012-13 rules, yes. 2010-11 rules, no.
NFHS has stated to revert to previous language even though it didn't make these changes for the current book.
Very poor by the NFHS and tough situation for the officials.:(

In a similar situation (4.19.8 F) the Team A throw-in is released and before the ball is legally touched a double foul occurs. As with an inadvertent whistle, play resumes from the POI. In this caseplay the ball is given back to Team A not on the basis of team control; but because the throw-in had not ended. Evidently the ruling is based on what we have been told that team control on a throw-in only applies to fouls by a member of the throw-in team. My guess is (although I don't like it) that if the IW occurred after the legal deflection we would go AP. But in the OP, the IW came after A2 had possesion so the POI would be Team A ball. Your thoughts?

It is not that tough. Do what we say in football, "The official that has the inadvertent whistle buys the first round."

IW are usually so rare that it does not matter. And I do not think I have ever seen one on this situation. Heck the officials in the OP could have just gone with the violation and moved on and it would not have been an issue. ;)

Peace

All this brings to mind one of the worst calls we must make, by rule. A lead by 1 with seconds left in the game, A1 is trying to dribble out the clock in the backcourt, closely guarded by B1. A1 loses his footing, and the ball rolls free toward B's basket. But before B1 can reach the ball and score the winning layup, the whistle inexplicably sounds.

OOPS

By rule, not only is B denied the uncontested layup, but A gets the ball back.


I would like to see a change here.

In the event of an inadvertent whistle while the ball is loose, it shall be a judgment call by the official which team shall be awarded possession.

What would the NCAA ruling be on the OP?

In the NCAA there is true TC on a throw-in per 4-15-1.2c: When a player of that team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in

FED 4-12-2d "when a player of the team has disposal of the ball for a throw-in."

But the Fed said that is not the case, it was a mis-print.

The Fed says a lot of things. Most of them are contradictory.

They told us the rules on all this mess had been reverted. They then published the rules with the new rules intact.

Except where it's absolutely ridiculous to do so (I'm looking at you requiring player control in the front court for a backcourt violation on a ball which is touched in the front court), I think we are bound to officiate the rules as published.