First to touch?

[bigda65]

Originally Posted by BigT

I have a questions. When he came back onto the court was the ball bouncing and did he start dribbling. Or did he pick up the ball and start a dribble? If he picked up the ball and started to dribble it is an illegal dribble not an OB violation.

He batted the ball back inbounds with one hand.

[bigda65]

It gets a little better today.

He called me today and left me a voicemail : He believes that since his momementum didnt carry him out of bounds, that the right call was OOB.

I asked him two questions in an email that I havent heard back from him yet.

1) In that situation, what advantage was gained when he left the court and then returned?

2) A nine year old kid chasing a loose ball toward the line, does not constitute momentum?

I could give two hoots in georgia about the bet, this has happened two weeks in a row and 4 different officials missed this, I just want them to get it right.

What other questions can I ask that can shed the light? help me out fellas!

If he believes that he left the court on purpose, should that be a warning or a technical? I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that it should never be an OOB call, correct?

[Adam]

No, if he believed the kid left on purpose, that's a violation. No actual advantage required.

[bigda65]

Originally Posted by Adam

No, if he believed the kid left on purpose, that's a violation. No actual advantage required.

I agree that it is a violation, but not an OOB violation, correct?

[Adam]

This is a lot of hassle for a third/fourth grade basketball game, and a lot of expectation for the folks who actually put a whistle around their neck and give their time to ref.

Originally Posted by bigda65

I agree that it is a violation, but not an OOB violation, correct?

No, but for all intents and purposes, it's the same thing. The result is identical.

And this is the portion of your post to which I was responding:

Originally Posted by bigda65

If he believes that he left the court on purpose, should that be a warning or a technical? I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that it should never be an OOB call, correct?

Leaving the court on purpose is not a technical foul, and the only things that "should be a warning" are the four specified "Delay of Game" warnings. All other warnings are courtesies and should never be expected.

[bigda65]

No hassle at all really. Their time is not given, they are paid.

The problem I have now, is two fold,

1) at the start of this whole discussion, this official had no idea that you could save the ball to yourself

2) after he found out that you could indeed do this, he is trying to defend the call that was made, using the word "momentum" as a crutch to do it.

Unfortunately, this is the mindset in my area, unapproachable and never wrong and never willing to learn the game.

For me now, it is all principle no hassle at all.

[Adam]

I highly doubt they're paid enough to go beyond covering their mileage expenses. To me, unless you're paying them upwards of $20 a game, they're giving their time.

At that level, you aren't getting (for the most part) varsity level officials any more than you're getting varsity level coaches. I'm not saying you're wrong on points one and two, but you really need to let the principle go. You've taught him the rule. Maybe it's not a horrible thing to just take that win and let him keep his pride rather than chase down a principle and ruin a friendship.

[bigda65]

$20 a game, none of these officials travel more that 15 miles, this particular official does do varsity level games.

Here is the priciple - yes I agree with the win in teaching him a new rule, but it will be useless if it is not applied correctly. As is the case in my situation, now knows the rule, but chooses to mis-apply it, to fit the call that was made.

Friendly banter I promise, no friendship will be lost! I do appreciate the concern, and not sarcastically either!

[Adam]

Fair enough. Here's how I read the situation, take it for what you will.

You've shown him he was wrong, and he responded by justifying the call in hindsight. That doesn't mean he'll call it that way in the future; it means he's defending his call before. Nothing more. The fact is, this is an often misunderstood rule in basketball and he now knows the proper ruling.

If it was up to me, Billy's myth list would be pared down to about 5, and this would make the list.

[Jay R]

Originally Posted by bigda65

No hassle at all really. Their time is not given, they are paid.

The problem I have now, is two fold,

1) at the start of this whole discussion, this official had no idea that you could save the ball to yourself

2) after he found out that you could indeed do this, he is trying to defend the call that was made, using the word "momentum" as a crutch to do it.

Unfortunately, this is the mindset in my area, unapproachable and never wrong and never willing to learn the game.

For me now, it is all principle no hassle at all.

There are a couple of guys that I work with that are like that. Whhen someone points out that they misapplied a rule, they try to twist things around to defend their position. We as officials represent the integrity of the game and when officials don't demonstrate integrity, it really bothers me. Admit you're wrong and learn from the experience.

[MD Longhorn]

Originally Posted by bigda65

It gets a little better today.

He called me today and left me a voicemail : He believes that since his momementum didnt carry him out of bounds, that the right call was OOB.

If that's true, OOB was not the right call. Leaving the floor voluntarily was the right call. And we're shooting.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

If that's true, OOB was not the right call. Leaving the floor voluntarily was the right call. And we're shooting.

Shooting why?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by MD Longhorn

And we're shooting.

Are you confusing the violation for leaving the court for an unauthorized reason, with the technical foul for remaining out of bounds, and delaying a return inbounds, after a throwin pass is completed?