[NFHS] Violation on free throw shooter?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

Would you grant the same leniency to defender in the top lane space who decides to go talk to his coach well after the shooter has the ball but well before he actually takes the shot? Didn't really disconcert but violated none the less.

What did he do that was against the rules?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

What did he do that was against the rules?

Are you really asking that question? Or is there some hidden point you're making?

[Nevadaref]

Obviously, his point is that he is reading the post such that the player talked with his coach while remaining in his lane space, even though the other poster used the word "go."

[JetMetFan]

So here's the problem: If we all think "I'm not going to be the only one calling it" then "it" never gets called...and we end up discussing "it" in online forums.

I've had assignors/supervisors tell me they've heard similar feelings from officials and while they understand that also doesn't absolve us from taking care of things. Their response has been make the call - assuming the call in question is supported by the rules - then let them (the supervisor/assignor) know if you took any flak. That's where they step in and give the association its marching orders. We can't get the whole "one rule, one interpretation" thing dealt with if we stay quiet.

[dsqrddgd909]

Originally Posted by jetmetfan

so here's the problem: If we all think "i'm not going to be the only one calling it" then "it" never gets called...and we end up discussing "it" in online forums.

I've had assignors/supervisors tell me they've heard similar feelings from officials and while they understand that also doesn't absolve us from taking care of things. Their response has been make the call - assuming the call in question is supported by the rules - then let them (the supervisor/assignor) know if you took any flak. That's where they step in and give the association its marching orders. We can't get the whole "one rule, one interpretation" thing dealt with if we stay quiet.

+1.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

So here's the problem: If we all think "I'm not going to be the only one calling it" then "it" never gets called...and we end up discussing "it" in online forums.

I've had assignors/supervisors tell me they've heard similar feelings from officials and while they understand that also doesn't absolve us from taking care of things. Their response has been make the call - assuming the call in question is supported by the rules - then let them (the supervisor/assignor) know if you took any flak. That's where they step in and give the association its marching orders. We can't get the whole "one rule, one interpretation" thing dealt with if we stay quiet.

The real problem is actually when the assignors don't back the officials who make calls which are fully supported by the rules and worse yet when they actively advocate not following the rules during games and do such themselves when officiating.

That is what makes it extremely difficult for those officials who strive to enforce the rules as written.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The real problem is actually when the assignors don't back the officials who make calls which are fully supported by the rules and worse yet when they actively advocate not following the rules during games and do such themselves when officiating.

That is what makes it extremely difficult for those officials who strive to enforce the rules as written.

+1

It's all well and good to go out and start making these calls, and I agree that enforcement puts a quick end to silly crap like this, but there are some calls that some assigners just don't want to worry about. This is one in some areas.

As is the twisted heel over the lane line in a gymnastic stance during the free throw.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

+1

It's all well and good to go out and start making these calls, and I agree that enforcement puts a quick end to silly crap like this, but there are some calls that some assigners just don't want to worry about. This is one in some areas.

As is the twisted heel over the lane line in a gymnastic stance during the free throw.

Enforcement of the coaching box seems to be near the top of this list too. Why do my colleagues think that it is okay for a guy to be at the division line "just coaching?" Drives me nuts to see.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

The twisted heel over the lane line during the free throw.

This is only legal in a girls game. Illegal in a boys game. It has something to do with the Y chromosome, but I'm not a geneticist, nor do I play one on television, so I really can't explain it.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

So here's the problem: If we all think "I'm not going to be the only one calling it" then "it" never gets called...and we end up discussing "it" in online forums.

I've had assignors/supervisors tell me they've heard similar feelings from officials and while they understand that also doesn't absolve us from taking care of things. Their response has been make the call - assuming the call in question is supported by the rules - then let them (the supervisor/assignor) know if you took any flak. That's where they step in and give the association its marching orders. We can't get the whole "one rule, one interpretation" thing dealt with if we stay quiet.

Here are my questions:
Are you counting ten seconds just as quickly on free throws as you do in the backcourt?

Are you calling a three second violation every time three seconds elapses with a player not getting both feet on the floor completely outside of the lane?

[Adam]

I had a great opportunity for a multiple foul last night. A1 going in for a layup, fouled by B1 as he was going up. Before he came down, B2 comes flying in and knocks him down.

Both players deserved the foul. I just picked one, though, because I don't want to be the only guy in my association to ever call a multiple foul.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

I had a great opportunity for a multiple foul last night. A1 going in for a layup, fouled by B1 as he was going up. Before he came down, B2 comes flying in and knocks him down.

Both players deserved the foul. I just picked one, though, because I don't want to be the only guy in my association to ever call a multiple foul.

So you allowed the second player a free whack on the shooter. Too bad.
You ignored a rule that was put in to protect players from exactly this because you were afraid that your peers would chide you?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

I don't want to be the only guy in my association to ever call a multiple foul.

Maybe the only guy in the world? You'll be famous. Or infamous?

[JetMetFan]

Originally Posted by Adam

Here are my questions:
Are you counting ten seconds just as quickly on free throws as you do in the backcourt?

Are you calling a three second violation every time three seconds elapses with a player not getting both feet on the floor completely outside of the lane?

Remember...I said the supervisor/assignor steps in and gives the association its marching orders. If, in the situation presented in the OP, they tell me don't call it, I won't. I have my principles but chief among them is keep working.

That being said...I'd never say there aren't gray areas acknowledged with some rules but I can't see any of my assignors telling us to ignore a kid stepping on the FT line after the ball is at his/her disposal. No call there has an immediate effect on whether a team scores. Additionally, it falls into the "Stevie Wonder in the cheap seats" category: Everyone sees it. I would hope an assignor/supervisor wouldn't even tell an official "just have the kid back up." I'm not saying that if I'm aware of it before the game I won't talk to the player but that's as far as I'll go. He/she can't figure it out once the game starts? That's life.

Think about it: I give A1 the ball, he/she purposely steps on the FT line, I call a violation...and I did something wrong? What is someone going to tell me? 'Yeah, he/she violated, but..." But what?

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The real problem is actually when the assignors don't back the officials who make calls which are fully supported by the rules and worse yet when they actively advocate not following the rules during games and do such themselves when officiating.

I'll give you that. I consider myself lucky. My assignors all tell us if the rules back us they'll support us and I haven't run into any problems in that regard. If there's something they don't want us to do, they let us know.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Remember...I said the supervisor/assignor steps in and gives the association its marching orders. If, in the situation presented in the OP, they tell me don't call it, I won't. I have my principles but chief among them is keep working.

That being said...I'd never say there aren't gray areas acknowledged with some rules but I can't see any of my assignors telling us to ignore a kid stepping on the FT line after the ball is at his/her disposal. No call there has an immediate effect on whether a team scores. Additionally, it falls into the "Stevie Wonder in the cheap seats" category: Everyone sees it. I would hope an assignor/supervisor wouldn't even tell an official "just have the kid back up." I'm not saying that if I'm aware of it before the game I won't talk to the player but that's as far as I'll go. He/she can't figure it out once the game starts? That's life.

Think about it: I give A1 the ball, he/she purposely steps on the FT line, I call a violation...and I did something wrong? What is someone going to tell me? 'Yeah, he/she violated, but..." But what?

I'm with you. I'd just as soon call this as not, but it's not an ethical issue for me. I disagree that it affects the score. There's no advantage here. None. Should it be called anyway? Sure, I'll go along with that; just like an obvious travel in the backcourt. I just don't think it's that big of a deal.

There are much bigger fish to fry, such as that $#$@$# heel hanging over the line for the defender.