I had a situation in a recent game where the ball was thrown up through the bottom of the basket. I immediately whistled it dead and used the arrow to determine who got the ball. Is this the correct way to deal with this situation.

No. The player that knocked it through the underside of the hoop committed a violation. The opponent should get the ball.

thanks for clearing that up

Just for clarification, the ball must pass all the way through the basket from below for this to be a violation. Just entering the basket and rising above the rim, but not clearing the net is not enough, since the net is part of the basket.
Way too many officials call this a violation when it is improper.

In this case where the ball goes above rim, but doesn't clear net, do we just continue to play or is it dead with AP?

Not a violation unless the ball goes all the way up,just like Nevada said.The bottom of the ball must clear the top of the ring. If not,play on.

BTW,if the ball does go all the way through on the way up,and you don't know who touched it last,or if it was touched last by 2 opponents simultaneously,then you still call the violation-but it now will be an AP.

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref ... Just entering the basket and rising above the rim, but not clearing the net is not enough, since the net is part of the basket.

Quote:

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee ... just like Nevada said.The bottom of the ball must clear the top of the ring. If not,play on.

Sorry to nit-pick, but assuming the net is pulled upward as the ball goes through, is the violation called after the ball clears the top of the ring, or the net, assuming net goes up higher???

I think that is physically impossible.If the net gets flipped up,it will stop the ball from going higher.Use the top of the ring and the bottom of the ball.

Let's hope no one from the NFHS reads this board, or else this situation could end up on the test!

But now we're ready for it.

PGCougar,
What JR wrote above is exactly why I posted my clarification. I do NOT agree with him. I say the ball has to clear the net too, otherwise the call is improper. The important rules are:
9-4 A player shall not travel with the ball, intentionally kick it, strike it with the fist or cause it to enter and pass through the basket from below.
1-10-1 ...Each basket shall consist of a single metal ring, 18 inches in inside diameter, its flange and braces, and a white-cord 12-mesh net, 15 to 18 inches in length, suspended from beneath the ring.
I may be the one who is nit-picking here, but according to the wording of those rules the ball must pass through the entire basket, which includes the net, before it is a violation.
Since we all agree that the net is part of the basket, and rule 9-4 says it is only a violation if the player causes the ball to "pass through the basket", not the just the ring, from below, the ball must clear the net as well as the ring before the official should call a violation.

Use the top of the ring and the bottom of the ball.

[/B][/QUOTE]
9-4 A player shall not travel with the ball, intentionally kick it, strike it with the fist or cause it to enter and pass through the basket from below.
1-10-1 ...Each basket shall consist of a single metal ring, 18 inches in inside diameter, its flange and braces, and a white-cord 12-mesh net, 15 to 18 inches in length, suspended from beneath the ring.

[/B][/QUOTE]Nevada,sometimes you try to think way too much about these rules.The language used above says "suspended from beneath the ring". If there was a different call for special circumstances like the net hanging UP,believe me,a casebook play would have been added. There has been no casebook play added on this one for a net defying the laws of gravity. Personally,I can't think of any circumstance where you could have the net sticking above the basket and the ball now going completely up through.Feel free to call it your way,though,if you ever see it.

JR,
I am not talking about any laws of physics defying situation. I am only considering the case in which the ball is rising from below and hits the nets, pushing it up through the level of the ring. So now we have both the ball and the net above the level of the ring. (Since the diameter of the ball is only about 10 inches and the net is 15-18 inches in length, this situation is not only possible, but I have seen it.) However, from this point, the ball does not continue upward and pass through the net exiting on the other side, but instead falls back down through the ring, with the net still on top of it, and comes clear of the basket on the underside.
I think this is the play PGCougar is asking about. I think that it is a very logical and sane question, so I have tried to answer it based on what the rules say. I do acknowledge that most officials do not call it the way it is written, but the way that you have stated. I simply feel this is improper. It would be interesting to see what the answer was (violation or no violation) if this senario ever appeared on a NFHS rules exam.

It is also interesting to note that the language for a goal clearly specifies that the ball does not have to pass all the way through the basket (read net) for a goal to be scored, but may remain in the basket. See 5-1-1.
I feel that if the rules committee wanted the violation to be called for the ball just entering, or entering and remaining in the basket from below, they would have said so, but instead they have clearly written, "enter and pass through the basket."

Last thought, would you call a violation or a jump ball if the ball entered from below and somehow remained in the basket without passing through?

I'd have to go with a jump ball.
Just my take on it.

Nevada,if the ball didn't pass through,then I agree that it can't be a violation. Jump ball- AP- would be the appropriate call then,I think.

Just hold your whistle for a second. Whichever good samaritan jumps up to knock it loose is guilty of BI. Why bother with the arrow? :)