Resumption of Play Issue

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Interesting.

We have always been told the opposite of that. The T is still for Delay of Game, and so it applies to any Delay situations.

Do you have a reference or Interp for that?

We were told that the RPP has the "warning" built into it...if they still don't come out, we assess the T and all warnings are off.

This last part certainly isn't true. The NFHS made a point a few years ago about each and every RPP situation being different and the entire process starting over with a first live ball before assessing a team T. Someone can surely find that ruling.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

What are you missing?

10.1.5.A tells us it is a delay of game T for not occupying the required marked lane spaces following the RofP procedure.

9.2.10.A tells us that a DofG T also serves as the Warning recorded in the book and told to the HC.

I think that's wrong, Rocky. The DOG warning and then T is used only is the 4 (or 5?) specific situations mentioned.

Using the RPP is not a warning for any of those. It's a way to play even if the team doesn't come back from a TO.

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

When you guys whistle a DOG, not necessarily for the OP but any DoG, what is your mechanic? Do you actually go over to the offending team's coach or just Holler at the scorer's table?

Depends on how loud the gym is. I don't "go over to the offended team's coach" but I do make sure the scorer and both coaches know what happened.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I think that's wrong, Rocky. The DOG warning and then T is used only is the 4 (or 5?) specific situations mentioned.

Using the RPP is not a warning for any of those. It's a way to play even if the team doesn't come back from a TO.

.

Ok. You are number three to say that. I wasn't really convinced when the situation happened in our association, but that's what we were told. So...I would love to have the citation needed to take back to my next association meeting.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Ok. You are number three to say that. I wasn't really convinced when the situation happened in our association, but that's what we were told. So...I would love to have the citation needed to take back to my next association meeting.

4-47 Warning lists the 4 delays. Not occupying the bottom spots after a TO isn't one of them.

10-1-5 c, d, e, f, list the T's that are called after any warning.

10-1-5-b talks about a T "in these specific situations" (including the bottom two spots issue)

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

4-47 Warning lists the 4 delays. Not occupying the bottom spots after a TO isn't one of them.

10-1-5 c, d, e, f, list the T's that are called after any warning.

10-1-5-b talks about a T "in these specific situations" (including the bottom two spots issue)

I pulled out my notes from the discussion, and these rule citations are the same ones given to support the position that I stated earlier. The reasoning given is that they are all listed together, and the RofP specifically calls the T a delay T.

So your counterpoint is the use of the word "specific" sets these apart?

I really want to get this right, but seems like the interp we were given is not right.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

I pulled out my notes from the discussion, and these rule citations are the same ones given to support the position that I stated earlier. The reasoning given is that they are all listed together, and the RofP specifically calls the T a delay T.

So your counterpoint is the use of the word "specific" sets these apart?

I really want to get this right, but seems like the interp we were given is not right.

My counterpoint would be that the title of 4-47 is "Warning for Delay and the RPP violations are not listed in that rule. Then when you go to 10-1-5, "c", "d", "e", "f" correspond to rule 4-47 and specifically say "following any team warning for delay.

With RPP if a team doesn't comply you don't have a "warning for delay", you have a "violation for delay" which is followed by a Technical for further violation.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

My counterpoint would be that the title of 4-47 is "Warning for Delay and the RPP violations are not listed in that rule. Then when you go to 10-1-5, "c", "d", "e", "f" correspond to rule 4-47 and specifically say "following any team warning for delay.

With RPP if a team doesn't comply you don't have a "warning for delay", you have a "violation for delay" which is followed by a Technical for further violation.

Makes sense!

Thanks BNR, Bob, and Nevada.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rockyroad

Makes sense!

Thanks BNR, Bob, and Nevada.

Glad to help. I would also add a bit of info to what Bob already provided for you to convince those in your group.
BY RULE any one of the four warnings for delay is reported to both coaches and recorded in the scorebook. The official doesn't have anything recorded in the scorebook for the first delay during a RPP, so there is no way that such can apply to these other four specific situations.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Glad to help. I would also add a bit of info to what Bob already provided for you to convince those in your group.
BY RULE any one of the four warnings for delay is reported to both coaches and recorded in the scorebook. The official doesn't have anything recorded in the scorebook for the first delay during a RPP, so there is no way that such can apply to these other four specific situations.

Excellent point!

(Always listen to Bob and never neglect Nevada)

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by billyu2

Excellent point!

(Always listen to Bob and never neglect Nevada)

Guess I'm chopped liver.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Guess I'm chopped liver.

No-no. My bad. You da' man, BNR.