Rule question
 

What does NFHS rule 3-3-1e mean?

Basically, when one team has multiple subs, the other team can say:

Wait a minute, until everybody knows who his man is.

Who is guarding whom?
 

3-3-1e. A captain may request a defensive match-up if three or more substitutes from the same team enter during an opportunity to substitute.

If one team brings in 3 or more subs at one time, the other team can request a moment to figure out who is guarding whom. It's meant to be a quick situation. Don't allow the coaches to turn it into a free time out. Also, nobody has to go and line up at the division line.

Line Up ...
 

Back in the olden days, players would "line up" around the jump ball circles (there were three jump ball circles back then), not by rule, but by "custom".

I have yet to have a captain request this.

That is largely because about 99.95% of captains (and, likely, 90% of their coaches) have no idea the rule is there....

even if they knew the rule, i doubt it would be requested much.....how hard can it be to figure out who you are guarding?

What if.....

there isn't a defensive team captain on the floor to request the "match game" moment?

Why deny it. Don't look for trouble.

then you give whoever asked for one a technical foul for unauthorized speaking to an official:p

Official beckons subs in.
Subs enter the game, replaced players leave.
Official pauses 2-3 seconds while players do the "I've got 52, you take 23" thing.
Game resumes.

I'm with you, however, the rule specifically indicates a captain is to request, though.

If you request it, you're a captain.

I know this is a rule, but how often is this enforced? I have players ask me what the foul call was (politely) or how many shots we have and I don't think twice. Assuming no unsportsmanlike conduct or disrespect towards an official, has anyone ever T'd a non-captain player for speaking to the you?

Why would you? How would you? Based on what rule?

Fixed it for ya'.

Ah, I see now johnny d was joking. My fault.

Rant: Being new and reading a lot of the old threads to glean information, I realize that the communication on this board is rather unclear. A big part of our job as officials is to clearly and effectively communicate. Sarcasm and jokes are funny, but as we all know, text has an acute inability to communicate tone and inference. I suggest that we all try to be more clear in our writing, which I think would solve some of the communication problems I have noticed. Thoughts?

Pretty sure the use of the emoticion was a clear giveaway that he wasn't being serious but nonetheless...when you have posters who have interacted with each other for close to 10+ years, there tends to be a certain ebb and flow...which includes inside jokes, humor, sarcasm, and sometimes brevity which if you're on the boards long enough, you tend to pick up on. Sometimes that means things won't be spelled out explicitly every single time which may make things unclear for a new official or someone who doesn't frequent the boards.

My suggestion, if you have a question, ask it. Especially, as a new official, that should give those answering your question the proper mindset in answering your question (including being more explicit).

Ha!. Good one. For a moment, I thought you were being serious, but then I caught your tone.

Sounds good, thanks!

Right. It wasn't in blue font.

Since this thread started with my question, I'll ask a few more.

Regarding 3-seconds in the lane. Is there anything that causes a 3-second count to restart, similarly to how a closely guarded count is terminated? If player A1 goes into the paint for a shot, misses, and keeps putting up the rebound (and missing) for the next four seconds, what happens? Do I call the 3 seconds or is the count terminated upon a shot attempt?

As the trail, does it matter which arm I use for the 10-second count? I typically use the inside arm, but I watched a few varsity games on tv this week and all the officials used the outside arm.

1) What are the requirements for a 3-second call (see 9-xxx -- sorry no books here)? (asked in the spirit of getting you in the book). Are they all met during a shot? As a practical matter, have a more patient whistle during an interrupted dribble , "loose ball" (as an undefined term).

2) Doesn't really matter (unless in your area it does). Some say outside, some say table side. Some say whichever you didn't use to count the previous 5-seconds for inbouonding (if applicable).

Thanks for that! So you know I now understand the rule, the requirements for a three seconds call is team control in the frontcourt. I made a call earlier this season where team A had a frontcourt baseline throw-in, and the coach was mad I called 3 seconds even though the ball was only inside the court for 2 seconds. Do you think I should have a patient whistle on inbounds plays such as these?

This is not a question of a patient whistle. It is a question of knowing when the count starts.

You need to know the rule better. The count doesn't begin during a throw-in. While team control exists on a throw-in, that's not the same as team control in the frontcourt, which is what the rule (9-7-1) requires.

Here's a bit of advice from a guy who's been around a while -- don't make the 3-second violation your best call.

Don't avoid it when it needs to be called, but if you're calling them more than once or twice a week you should probably think about the spirit and intent of the rule.

Right, but as bob jenkins suggested, perhaps give some leeway during an interrupted dribble? I can see team A having a frontcourt baseline throw-in, player A1 being in the lane for two seconds before the ball is passed inbounds, and then remaining for one second after the ball is inbounds. In such a case I could call three seconds, but unless there is an advantage gained, should I? What if player A1 hits three seconds in the lane but is headed out?

Is there team control in the frontcourt during an end line throw-in?

Team control in the frontcourt is different than team control during a throw-in.

The count, by rule, doesn't start until the ball is inbounds and there is team control in the frontcourt. Out of bounds for a throw-in does not equal frontcourt.

No good official is looking to nail teams on three second violations. It's time to stop looking to do so, IMO.

You could call it, but you'd be incorrect, by rule (and by practicality).

The rule requires (a) TC (b) in the FC.

You have (a) during a throw-in, but not (b). The inbounds spot is OOB; it's neither in the FC nor in the BC.

Are you saying the baseline (and out of bounds area?) under a team's basket is not part of their frontcourt? I read the rule in the book just now but am still confused.

I promise I won't!

That's exactly right. The frontcourt is the area inbounds between (and not including) the endline and the division line. Out of bounds is neither frontcourt or backcourt.

This is from the last year's basketball interpretations:

SITUATION 2: A1 has the ball for an end-line throw-in in his/her frontcourt. The administering official reaches a four-second count when A1 passes the ball to A2, who had been standing in the free-throw lane since A1 had the ball at his/her disposal. RULING: Legal. Even though a team is now in control during a throw-in, the three-second rule specifically requires that a team be in control in its frontcourt for a violation to occur. Technically speaking, the thrower-in is out of bounds and not located in the frontcourt. (4-35-2; 9-7)

Ok, got another one. I am the trail. Team A has gathered a defensive rebound and is in their backcourt. Player A1 is dribbling the ball towards the division line, while team B is pressing. Player A1 passes the ball from his backcourt location to A2, who was located in the frontcourt, but is jumping and lands in the backcourt. A2, in mid-jump, taps the ball back to A2. Due to A2's previous location being in the frontcourt, I call an over and back violation. Is this correct? Does it matter if the pass-back is a tap or with two hand?

Ooooh, I like that! :D

Casebook play 9.9.1 Situation C

Which runs counter to the wording, but is consistent with the old wording. :rolleyes:

Who You Gonna Call ???
 

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6230/6...473e048e_m.jpg

The intent of the three-second rule is to not allow an offensive player in the lane to gain an advantage. There is no three-second count between the release of a shot and the control of a rebound, at which time a new count starts. There is no three-second count during a throwin. There is no three-second count while the ball is in the backcourt. There is a three-second count during an interrupted dribble. There is a three-second count while an offensive player has one foot in the lane and one foot outside of the lane, and the three-second count continues if this player lifts the foot in the lane so that neither foot is touching inside the lane. To stop the count this player must have both feet touch the court outside of the lane. It’s a violation for a player to step out of bounds in an attempt to avoid a three second violation. Allowance shall be made for a player who, having been in the restricted area for less than three seconds, dribbles in or moves immediately to try for goal.

Speaking Captain ?? Starter ?? Blue Line All The Way Around ...
 

Better yet? What if there isn't a "speaking captain" on the floor, just a regular, run of the mill, ordinary, garden variety, captain?

Whoever speaks to me during the game is the captain.

It is not requested largely because coaches have no idea the rule exists (thanks, Mark :) ). I can tell you that back when I coached, we virtually always played man-to-man defense in the half court. Most of the teams we played would play a zone defense (until we got ahead :) with no shot clock). If the other team ran in three subs, I would occasionally ask for a line-up through my players. MOST of the REFEREES did not know the rule, either!!!

In our Varsity Boys game last Saturday night, one of the coaches called a time out specifically because his players managed to have two defenders on one of the wings and NO ONE guarding the point guard leading to an easy basket. In that situation, the team only subbed two players therefore the defense would not have been able to make the request, but it is still a rule.

APG posted the appropriate case play.

"But jTheUmp", you say "that case play deals with a non-airborne player, and my situation deals with an airborne player."

The fact that the player was airborne doesn't make any difference. Airborne players retain the status (inbounds, OOB, front court, backcourt) that they had prior to going airborne. Or, as has been more eloquently stated here previously:
"You are where you were until you get where you're going"

tl;dr: You got the call correct, it does not matter if the pass (or tap) is with one hand or two.

Thanks!

Another question: I having been working solely two-man, but have an upcoming three-man game. What advice would you give me so my first time goes smoothly?

Likewise, though in nearly every MSG game I've worked, the beginning of every quarter is a defensive match-up. I never deny it.

How has this thread reached three pages without anyone calling B.S. on Seanwestref's questions?

I know and respect the spirit of treating everyone with an open mind, but ...

There is absolutely NO WAY he is an official who has ever sat through any sort of class or passed any sort of test. NO. WAY.

I'm not saying he doesn't do games at some level somewhere, but suddenly 3-whistle games? Please.

Do Editors Edit Anymore ???
 

Because, for a few years back in the 1990's, it didn't exist. For some reason, it was inadvertently left out of the rule book, and then reinstated. No reason, no explanation. My local IAABO interpreter told me that I was one of only a few officials, nationally, that noticed the error, that led to having the rule reinstated. I don't know if that's true, or not. Maybe he just told me that to make me feel important.

Fasten Your Seatbelt, We're Going To Cuba
 

I just don't like him "shifting gears" in the middle of a thread. It's like he's hijacking his own thread. He should try clicking on the new thread button. It works every time.

No, there's nothing the OP has asked that is necessarily out of the ordinary for newer officials. Just because you may have found them to be rudimentary or easy doesn't mean a new official will pick it up off the bat.

And you don't know the circumstances behind why the official is working 3-man.

And to the seanwestref...if you have drastically different scenarios not related to the original thread, you'd have an easier time getting answers by starting a new thread.

Thanks! I will create a new thread from now on. In this case, I thought I would knock out all my questions in one place instead of cluttering the front page.

You could make one thread and ask about multiple scenarios.

+1,000 plus a fine Cuban cigar.

MTD, Sr.

Smoking is bad for you and Cuban cigars are illegal in this country.

How'd you get to be a moderator?:D

As a Godfather from Youngstown, Ohio, I made Brad an offer he couldn't refuse, :D.

MTD, Sr.

Possessing Cuban cigars is not illegal. Importing, distributing, and selling them are illegal. ;)

I feel ODog deserves a reply.
 

Maybe because they are more polite than you? What would "calling BS" on my questions look like? Am I not allowed to ask simple, basic questions? (sarcasm here, also rhetorical)

Ah, there it is. I am not advanced enough for ODog. Good thing others are more tolerant of young officials, and are willing to help them with questions almost every young official deals with.

Down, ODog, Down! Bad ODog!

I hope your friends have learned to simply ignore anything you say after "but", because I am fast learning to. You are a lot more polite before you put in the "but".

"Absolutely NO WAY"? How confident are you? Would you stake your life on it? Taking the (in my area) NFHS test is not that difficult. It is, after all, an open-book test. (yes I passed)

Again with the "but". Yes, "suddenly 3-whistle games". If you want to know how I got this opportunity, simply ask me. Otherwise: http://i.imgur.com/06hE1.gif

Again, you don't know.

And thank you, good sir!

Are there any classroom sessions prior to the test date where an interpreter walks aspiring officials through the rules book or is it just show up with a book on test day and release for assignment anyone who passes?

Why would that matter? I've been doing this 20 years and I dig into the rules deeper than most and I still find things that I didn't know occasionally.

For most rookies, they get a lot of stuff wrong even after they've heard it....it is overload. You can find a lot of stuff in the book as you need while taking the test but that doesn't mean they're remember it all on demand.

Because classes make it significantly less likely you'll have a "certified" official calling 3 seconds on inbounds plays and during shot and rebound attempts. Just offering the exam without any contextual rules/floor training is irresponsible and unfair to local teams who use that pool of officials.

Three seconds is also probably the top myth debunked in a new officials class, the kind of "light bulb" information that makes you say to yourself, "Whoa. That's one to file away."

I know some of you think this is coming from some high-and-mighty douche, but trust me, I know I'm the donk who ruled "back of the backboard" on an inbounds pass that wound up on the court.

I just find it scary and borderline reckless that someone who actually has a rules book, passed a test and is doing games isn't familiar with the 3-second rule -- at all.

That's why I found the whole thread fishy and perhaps a "chain yank" that had gone on too long (insert Manti Te'o joke here).

Once again, I was wrong. So now I'm just curious if classes are available to aspiring officials in seanwestref's area.

If you did, you'd be wrong.

Curious as to the specifics of the "myth" as taught in your class.

As you know all too well from the jackals in the stands, it seems a large number of people think a three-second violation is for standing in the lane for 3 seconds, without regard to the location of the ball or who has control of it.

And even when you finally explain it to "that coach" who just decides to yell "three seconds" indiscriminately, you tend to get the "OK, I didn't realilze that. Thank you."

And now we know even working officials who have passed a test also subscribe to the myth.

APG already responded to him. Your retort was unnecessary. He might have been over the top, but he has a point. I can't imagine an official getting on the court (especially having passed the test - even open book) that doesn't understand the 3-second rule. But say it happened. You, not understanding this rule, somehow pass the test without reading this rule, and end up on the court.

Then you make the call and a coach yells at you for it. Did it not occur to you that you MIGHT be wrong? Sure as hell would have occurred to me - and I'd be digging in the rule book that night - likely, if possible, in the locker room before driving off. I would bet that my first year (for each sport), I was in the rulebook before driving off at least 3/4 of the time. Possibly to confirm I was right about something, and sometimes learning I was wrong. The coach jumping on you for not knowing a rule in your first year should ALWAYS trigger this.

We try to welcome new officials here. Sometimes we do a crappy job of it, but based on this thread alone, I'd say you got a better welcome than many. We all remember being new. But we also remember checking the BOOK first - then possibly coming here and stating a situation, saying what we found in the book, and then asking if we were interpreting the book right.

Since we're all 'fessing up and getting along, I'll admit now, after this post, I almost asked: Is this guy putting us on?

Instead I'll just say that I'm certain really soon sean will realize how elementary a couple of his questions were.

When I first started, the test to get my license required 80 correct answers out of 100. So I could be dead wrong about 20% of the game and still get licensed. It's easy to see how 3 seconds could be part of the 20% you didn't know.

I haven't had to take a basketball rules exam to maintain my license since 2000.

I do take a soccer exam every year, but there the passing score is just 75%.

Here, passing is only 70% and the questions are true/false. This means, theoretically, you would get 50% right if you don't even read the questions.
You really don't have to know much to pass the test.

On the other hand, there are questions on the test that never come up anywhere else.

Exactly right. There are so many rules and cases for a first-year guy to consider, it is very overwhelming at times.

You are absolutely correct, it is my job and responsibility to know the 3-second rule. I blew that call.

I know, someone already answered that for me.

Yes, I did check the book right away. I had a 7-5-7a situation happen recently where my partner insisted that passing out of bounds was a violation. I did not know the rule, checked at halftime, and apologized to the coach when I came out at halftime. The coach could do nothing but shake my hand and the game went on. As a first-year guy I do recognize knowing the rulebook is one of the priorities and I am working on it. However, I have found some of the intricacies of the rules to be difficult to understand.

Here is my reasoning for counting 3-seconds during an inbound. Rule 9-7-1: "A player shall not remain for three seconds....while the ball is in control of his/her team in his/her frontcourt". I combined that rule with 4-12-2d, while not realizing that the out-of-bounds area surrounding the frontcourt is not also considered frontcourt. From an advantage/disadvantage viewpoint it is easy to consider that, during a frontcourt endline throw-in, a player might box out his defender while directly under the basket, gaining what I think is an unfair advantage.

In this thread, I have only asked about plays that 1) I was unsure about after the game ended, and 2) that I looked up in the rule/casebook but was confused by the wordings. I asked about the 3-second call I made, I was wrong. I asked about the over-and-back call I made, I was right. Simple questions perhaps, but mark my words: I will not make the same mistake twice. That's my takeaway from this thread, and why I come here to learn from you guys.

Fair enough.

Back to the understanding that OOB is not frontcourt, Sean... if you had a throw-in under the basket, and he threw it all the way over the entire frontcourt to land (or be caught) in the backcourt ... would you have a violation? (Assume you're not an NBA ref for the purposes of this conversation).

No, I would not. OOB is neither in the frontcourt, nor the backcourt, and possession can be gained in either court with no violation.

Sean

And now you'll never make that mistake again. Unfortunately, that's one of the best ways that we learn... make an incorrect call, look it up afterwards, and realize that you screwed up.

Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment.

Exactly - same logic applies to 3 seconds. (I guess I should have asked if you would have ruled this way BEFORE learning today that OOB was not in the frontcourt)

Seems he might be trying to apply the "team control" during a throw in to this situation, when it really only applies to a foul by the offense on a throw in. I think that is what is confusing him.

That, and he was incorrectly thinking that you could have FC status during a throw-in.

... that, and he was incorrectly thinking the 3-second count is not terminated on shot attempts.

FYI, I teach those classes in my area.

You have to consider that you get a wide variety of people that want to be officials....from someone who barely knows the basketball is round to those that have been paid to play professionally. It is simply unrealistic to expect that all of them will know all of the rules and mechanics after even 1-2 years of classes. It is just not going to happen in the real world. That is why they're on the freshman games (or middle school in some areas). They're there to make mistakes....of all types. That is how they ultimately learn. For that matter, I've corrected accomplished 20-year vets on rules issues on more than one occasion..

If you made people be experts in the rules before giving them their first game, we'd never get new people to last long enough to work their first game and we'd be extremely shorthanded.

I just think if seanwestref had gone to a class to complement the test -- your class included, CRust -- he wouldn't be asking about the fundamental principles of one of the rules most butchered by fans, coaches and players.

This isn't "knowing ALL the rules" (which I certainly don't). This is knowing the 3-second rule, the one you know from your classes has everyone going "ahhhhh haaa," similar to when you tell them someone can rebound their own airball or that a kick has to be intentional.

Every game every one of us has ever done has had at least one person (and likely many more) mistakenly clamoring for 3 seconds.

I do see what you're saying re: the spectrum, however. I guess I don't consider that people who haven't been around basketball much would take an interest in officiating it, even though I've seen it in action. You're definitely right.

... and I know I've contributed to making this thread way longer than it needed to be by being flabbergasted and suspicious of its content.

Now that it's proven to be a sincere inquiry, I humbly lay down my sword.

I didn't play basketball beyond 8th grade, despite the fact that I was 6'2" as a high school freshman (tallest in my class).

Got into officiating basketball mainly for "something to do" during the winter after football season ended. And believe me, I made A LOT of mistakes that first year, like the game where I called OOB on 5 or 6 different occasions for a ball hitting the top of the backboard. My partner (a seasoned veteran) didn't correct me until we got into the locker room after the game. I felt like an idiot, but he cheered me up with a "Hey, it's a freshman game, that's why you start here. And now you'll never make that mistake again".

1. You had five of these plays in one game? If I see five in a season, that's a lot.

2. I would have corrected you much sooner (first chance to talk.)

Reminds me of a tale I've told on here before where I did an AAU game in Conn. w/a woman I'd never met before. About 1 minute into the game, A1's shot bounces high off the rim and bounces on top of the backboard before falling back into play. FROM THE LEAD (alarm #1), she whistles OOB (alarm #2). I will add this was a freestanding, portable hoop. Think NBA-style, but w/o the cameras and shot clock -- nothing above the board at all.

During a time-out shortly thereafter, I kindly went over and asked her what she had on that play. "It hit the top of the backboard." "And...?" "That's out of bounds." "No, it's not."

... and then the kicker: "Oh, well I'm from Mass., and up there, it's out of bounds."

"Yeah, I am too. And it's the same everywhere -- in."

"OK, we can do it your way if you want." :confused:

I don't have to tell you how the rest of the game went. And yeah, I guess backboard conundrums just find me;)

Unbelievable! Is she married?