LV at UConn rule misapplications
 

The crew misapplied two rules during this contest:
A. About 10:30 remaining TWO officials whistle and signal offensive BI for a player grasping the ring who reaches out and grabs the ball which was nowhere near the cylinder. Call should have been a T. Class B.
B. with just over 1:30 left LV has the ball. It gets knocked away by a defender and then strikes the LV player before going into bc. The covering official gives the "tip" signal and does not call a bc violation.

Perhaps it has something to do with UConn games this season!

My son told me about Play A. Made me go, Hmmmm as I quizzed him about BI vs GT. Glad his account was accurate as it didn't sound right. But, I guess it was!

I do not consider the second one a misapplication of the rules, I consider that a missed judgment. I am not sure he saw the touch of the leg. He was signaling rather quick.

Peace

More times than not, in this case, it is a misapplication. I've seen it too many times when the contact was obvious where it couldn't be chalked up to judgement.

I think in most of these cases the only way you know it is a misapplication of the rule based on not knowing the rule is talking to the official. I also think officials often do not want to "guess" on a play like this either.

Peace

Play #1
 

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/qCcZyym2ypE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Why...?
 

Why would a person even call that BI or a T? He attempted a shot, missed, didn't hang on the rim, and his hand released the rim before the gained control of the ball. Making a mountain out of a mole-hill to me. You shouldn't call a travel either, because he did attempt a shot, and he is allowed to get his own rebound even if it doesn't hit the rim.

They should have called travelling on the guard who passed him the ball. I have nothing as far as BI or grasping the ring.

NFHS: 10-3-4a

The moment he used the rim to swing to the other side for the rebound while hanging on the rim with the other hand, he lost he privilege of grasping the rim for safety and stepped into the area of gaining an advantage by contact with the rim. If he had instead let go and fell to the floor, he wouldn't have been in position for the rebound....white #2 would have got it. Personally, I think that BI would be the just ruling (but it isn't actually BI).

I don't have anything on the first play.

I agree with Camron, I'd have a T.

I'm leaning towards nothing.

and Play #2
 

<iframe width="853" height="480" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/yUA1YHJlrkM" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Agreed, that is what I was thinking when I saw this play.

Play #2 I saw live and thought this was clearly missed. I just think a lot of officials simply give the benefit of the doubt for a touch by the defense and consider it a tip and never call the violation.

Peace

I don't see him as using the rim to swing. I see an attempted dunk, a released rim and a rebound. Given that he attempted a dunk, I would need to see some secondary action that was not part of the momentum of the dunk before I would feel that he had illegally contacted the rim and I just don't see that here.

In other words, I do think he let go and fell to the floor. You seem to think that he should have fell straight down but his momentum was towards the basket so unless he used the rim to check his momentum he's going to fall to the other side of the basket, like we see in the video.

It's nothing for me.

Agreed.

Play 1. Travel on #2, nothing on the dunk.

Play 2. It looks to me that the official got straightlined and didn't get a good look at the ball hitting the leg.

Leads Signal?
 

Should lead be calling this? And mirroring?

I agree

No. And no one should be using the "swirlie signal."

You tell Doug Shows he can't use the 'swirlie' signal.

When I saw them mirroring the BI, the swirlie's and the Lead w/ his "honk your horn!" motions, I started looking for a disco-crystal ball to drop in to the screen.

But he did hang on the rim - long enough to help himself swing toward the ball... and "before he gained control of the ball" is not the measure here - before he began his attempt to reach the ball would be more accurate (and the fact that he did NOT release the rim before attempting to get the ball is the reason for the clear violation).

I hope this video is used in training.

Watch it again. watch the 1st replay, and pause your screen the second the hands hit the rim. Decide for yourself where his natural landing point is... and then unpause. He swings a good solid foot, perhaps a foot and a half, toward the ball before landing.

I've got nothing as far as BI

I don't do college, so it doesn't come up all that often, but this is an honest question: What is the approved signal for BI and/or goaltending?

I think if it ever came up in a HS game, I'd probably reflexively do the swirlie motion, but I don't want to be "that guy" if it's a fake signal.

His natural landing point if the rim hadn't been there or his natural landing point given that he just tried to dunk the ball? I do not see him use the ring to adjust his flight in response to missing the dunk.

I have no issue with the swirlie. Everybody knows what it means.

There isn't one. For me, after stopping the clock, point at either the offender or the basket, state "That's basket interference." and give the other team's direction/signal for points to be awarded.

Everybody knows what it means when an official says "on the floor" too. Doesn't make it right. I just want to know the right signal (if there is one).

The problem with saying "on the floor" is that it helps spread the belief that a player can't be in the act of shooting if they're on the floor (and as a side note, it's been my experience that those that do say "on the floor" are incorrectly not awarding free throws when they should be). The NBA signal for basket interference does no such thing.

There's a difference, as APG said. On the floor is frequently incorrect from a rules perspective.

There is no signal on the chart specifically for BI.

Either one, actually.

Agreed. His momentum was going to place him in that approximate area.

Well, we just see this differently then.

That's how I see it. I don't see his direction changed significantly enough to warrant a T. No way I get BI on this, the ball was down by his knees when he caught it.

I had one this summer where the would-be dunker hung up there, reached up and grabbed the ball as it was well above the rim. It was probably slightly outside the cylinder, but we went with BI rather than the T.

Had that very play a few years ago. Player, now at UNLV, stayed on the rim and with the ball above the cylinder, grabbed the ball with off hand, and tried to dunk it.

It isn't just the change of direction but the fact that he was suspended in air, briefly, by the rim grab and was able to get his other arm out to try to catch the rebound while hanging on the rim. He didn't let go then, in a separate action, try to catch the ball.

You might also want to watch the video again. He may have bobbled the ball and only controlled it when it was at his knees, but he got his hand on it when it was still above his head and just after he let go....long before it got to his knees.

Fair enough, but WRT the T, he didn't hang on the rim long enough that a T would have been called with no one under him. I'm not sure I could justify that call.

Did he gain an advantage by hanging there? I'm not sure he hung long enough to say he did, since he released the rim almost immediately.

WRT BI, I may have exaggerated with the "knees," but the ball was below the rim and nowhere near the cylinder when he first touched it.

Most players dunking the ball don't come down immediately, the act of grabbing the rim slows their descent. Specific gravity does not apply until they are no longer in contact with the rim. He did not catch the ball while in contact with the rim

At this point you're calling a T on him for grabbing the rim on a dunk.

He did not hang on the rim for an inappropriate amount of time. He didn't use the rim for leverage to reach a position he otherwise would not have reached after the attempted dunk (no second action on the rim). Yes, he hung there briefly after attempting to dunk. No, that is not illegally contacting the rim.

Agree...he legally grasped the rim and didn't hang on so long that it became illegal. But legally grabbing the rim doesn't allow him to use it for further advantage in going for a rebound while doing so. That is the distinction. And it is not BI by any reading of the rules...although I think that would be a more just call than the T.

Actually, more like the State Farm Insurance commercial, where the 2 "arena dudes" are lassoeing and "competitive cheering" and frolicking w/ ea. other, than the disco-ball...although Shows looks alot like Travolta in SNF.