Game Winner?

[ronny mulkey]

Originally Posted by ODog

Team A commits a foul in the scrum for the rebound and loses as a result of free throws that would not have been awarded if it had been a TC foul.

Granted, no one would really consider it controversial since most people would also have considered it a shot. So even that's not a horrible outcome.

My take on the video isn't so much that I would have ruled it a pass (heat of the moment, it'd be a shot in my game too, I think), but when I saw backcourt was the ruling, I thought about it and saw the official's point. And it turned out he was RIGHT (remember, the article with quotes from players and coaches says it was a pass).

So while you may not love the call and would never, under any circumstances, make it yourself, the official was right here, even if he had to go obscure/nitpick/risk public ridicule (which we do nightly anyway) to be so.

Odog,

I'm not really dissing this official - his judgement, his call. I'm not really dissing any official that is wanting to to make a judgement each time as to whether it is a pass or shot. But, I don't see any problem with any official that wants to factor in his judgement criteria that the 60' throw is above the rim and is headed for the rim/backboard and considers it a shot if it hits the rim/backboard (wow, why would he be throwing that ball towards the rim/backboard with 5 seconds left kind of thing). You use your pass judgement on teammates location, eyes looking toward streaking teammate or eyes looking toward rim/backboard, shooting form, etc. while I am trying to make certain that he does not get fouled, that he gets it off before the horn, that he doesn't land on an opponent who has established LGP, that an opponent doesn't leap up there and swat it away on it's downward flight, and after all that, will consider it a shot if it hits the backboard.

All I'm asking is why can't I deem it a shot (in my judgement) if it hits the backboard without demanding that you do as well? In short, err on the side of a shot?

[ODog]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

All I'm asking is why can't I deem it a shot (in my judgement) if it hits the backboard without demanding that you do as well? In short, err on the side of a shot?

You can. Most people have. I would have too. But the bulk of this crowd also deems it absurd and 100% out of the question that this guy ruled pass. They won't even consider his ruling ... and it turns out he was right.

I'm open to both outcomes, and you are too, so we're on the same page. I only quoted you b/c I was trying to answer your query as to the worst outcome arising from always erring on the shot side. That's what I came up with. We're cool

[canuckrefguy]

So in this situation, you can either:

1. Deem the play a "pass" - a judgement that is majorly controversial and subject to a great deal of disagreeement as to whether it is supported by either the letter or the spirit of the rules.

2. Deem the play a "shot", which nobody will disagree with, and likely can be supported by either the letter or spirit of the rules - and chalk it up to another one of those crazy plays.

Seems to me, you can no-call the BC violation on this play and likely be supported by the rulebook, and with not one single person in the gym questioning the referees at all.

[ODog]

Originally Posted by canuckrefguy

Seems to me, you can no-call the BC violation with not one single person in the gym questioning the referees at all.

You can also whistle a player for 3 seconds after rebounding his own misses for 15 seconds with not one single person in the gym (except MAYBE a coach) questioning you at all either.

The will of the people is rarely the way in basketball.

But I know that's not your point. You laid out the scenario perfectly, and I would take the easier road as well.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by ronny mulkey

Odog,
All I'm asking is why can't I deem it a shot (in my judgement) if it hits the backboard without demanding that you do as well? In short, err on the side of a shot?

Because of the rule defining what a shot is. A shot isn't defined as a ball that hits the backboard. It is defined as an attempt to throw the ball into the basket. Using the backboard as the factor to determine if it is a shot or not, as suggested by many, is just not supported by any rule or case play.

[ronny mulkey]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Because of the rule defining what a shot is. A shot isn't defined as a ball that hits the backboard. It is defined as an attempt to throw the ball into the basket. Using the backboard as the factor to determine if it is a shot or not, as suggested by many, is just not supported by any rule or case play.

Yes, an attempt to throw in the basket (in the official's judgement).

Using the backboard is not THE factor but a factor along with everything else. Judgement is a key part of the rule that you quote. My judgement is that on a 60' throw headed toward the basket in the last seconds of a period and it hits the backboard/rim OR misses the backboard by 1" IS A SHOT. My criteria. And, I understand maybe not your's?

Speaking of which, what is your criteria for your judgement?

[OKREF]

This is a half court 1 handed pass to the player cutting down the left side of the lane. It was off target, but it in no way looks like a shot to me. Just my opinion. Now if it is judged to be a pass, is this a backcourt?

[ronny mulkey]

Originally Posted by OKREF

This is a half court 1 handed pass to the player cutting down the left side of the lane. It was off target, but it in no way looks like a shot to me. Just my opinion. Now if it is judged to be a pass, is this a backcourt?

Using your opinion, the correct call is backcourt. During the huddle, if the trail indicated that in his opinion the throw was a pass, then let's put the .5 back on the clock and give the ball to the OTHER team. The crew didn't do that.

By the way, the first throw looks a lot more like a shot to me than the second one that went in. As you say - my opinion.