The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #61 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 29, 2013, 09:26pm
NFHS Official
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,733
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
We had a sizable discussion a while back about a similar situation. I think sometimes the statement about a team not being provided an advantage not intended by a rule comes into play.

The example given to end the discussion at that time was this:

A1 throws a pass high over the head of A2. As the pass sails out of bounds but well before it touches anything, the official sounds his whistle?

Is there anyone who would give the ball back to A in this situation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Will this be on the test? Technically, inadvertent whistle, point of interruption.

After the test, realistically ...
That's what I was going to say. IW and ball should go back to A.

Last edited by OKREF; Fri Nov 29, 2013 at 10:02pm.
Reply With Quote
  #62 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 29, 2013, 09:31pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
We're not taking a test here.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #63 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 29, 2013, 10:24pm
rsl rsl is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 301
another hypothetical

Say the possession arrow points to B, and A1 throws a long pass to a streaking A2 for an easy lay-up. But, before A2 can get a hand on the ball, we have an IW.

Anyone up for giving the ball to B?

Whether team control during a TI applies or not, an IW can be extremely unfair to one team or the other.
Reply With Quote
  #64 (permalink)  
Old Fri Nov 29, 2013, 11:46pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsl View Post
Say the possession arrow points to B, and A1 throws a long pass to a streaking A2 for an easy lay-up. But, before A2 can get a hand on the ball, we have an IW.
Anyone up for giving the ball to B?

Whether team control during a TI applies or not, an IW can be extremely unfair to one team or the other.
Throw-in did not end prior to IW, so POI is throw-in.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #65 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 30, 2013, 07:42am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: West Orange, NJ
Posts: 2,583
Quote:
Originally Posted by rsl View Post
Say the possession arrow points to B, and A1 throws a long pass to a streaking A2 for an easy lay-up. But, before A2 can get a hand on the ball, we have an IW.

Anyone up for giving the ball to B?

Whether team control during a TI applies or not, an IW can be extremely unfair to one team or the other.
Why would we give the ball to B? In your scenario we've already screwed up by most likely taking two points away from Team A on the IW. Now we'd be compounding the error by taking the ball away from Team A through the AP arrow. You think that's fair? At that point just finish the play by immediately calling a T on Team A's coach because that's the next thing that's going to happen.

Don't make a screw-up worse by making stuff up, especially stuff that isn't supported by rule.
__________________
"Everyone has a purpose in life, even if it's only to serve as a bad example."
"If Opportunity knocks and he's not home, Opportunity waits..."
"Don't you have to be stupid somewhere else?" "Not until 4."
"The NCAA created this mess, so let them live with it." (JRutledge)
Reply With Quote
  #66 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 30, 2013, 11:57am
rsl rsl is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 301
One more try...

Maybe I don't understand all of this thread. Help me out.

Say the possession arrow points to B, and A1 throws a long pass to a streaking A2 for an easy lay-up. A2 touches, but has not yet controlled the ball when an IW happens.

What is the call then?

TI has ended. If team control during TI applies only for the purpose of team control fouls, there is no team control in bounds yet.
Reply With Quote
  #67 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 30, 2013, 12:21pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
And this is where the debate lies. For me, until the NFHS clarifies this particular situation, I'm going with the written rule. By rule, TC continues after the throw in. The NFHS has made it clear they don't want it applying to BC violations, but that's an exception to the rule.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #68 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 30, 2013, 07:26pm
Courageous When Prudent
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Hampton Roads, VA
Posts: 14,705
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
And this is where the debate lies. For me, until the NFHS clarifies this particular situation, I'm going with the written rule. By rule, TC continues after the throw in. The NFHS has made it clear they don't want it applying to BC violations, but that's an exception to the rule.
Put me in the camp that TC applies until the defending team gains possession and that there is a special exception that only allows BC violations after PC has been gained inbounds.
__________________
A-hole formerly known as BNR
Reply With Quote
  #69 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 30, 2013, 07:53pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
This is deeper than just the debate about team control. In the OP, assuming the ball hit the bottom of the board, this should have been nothing, but was called a violation. But now what to do if this incorrect whistle sounds a split second before the ball is grabbed out of the air by team B? I'm gonna let the incorrectly called violation stand rather than change it to an accidental whistle and give the ball back to A.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #70 (permalink)  
Old Sat Nov 30, 2013, 10:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 17,835
there's a play in the NCAAW case book. I think it's also in the NCAAM book. A1 jumps from inbouds, grabs the ball and is about to land out of bounds. A1 requests a TO, and the official blows the whistle. (For those who don't know, in NCAA, the TO should NOT be granted in this case).

Ruling: IW, give the ball back to A, even though the "logical and obvious" conclusion of the play if there was no whistle would be a violation on A and the ball to B.

I don't see that as much different from the IW when B is about to grab the ball after it hits the bottom of the backboard, or any of the other plays that have been presented here to show why the IW rule might be "unfair."
Reply With Quote
  #71 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 01, 2013, 11:03am
beware big brother
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: illinois
Posts: 994
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
This is deeper than just the debate about team control. In the OP, assuming the ball hit the bottom of the board, this should have been nothing, but was called a violation. But now what to do if this incorrect whistle sounds a split second before the ball is grabbed out of the air by team B? I'm gonna let the incorrectly called violation stand rather than change it to an accidental whistle and give the ball back to A.
This is never a good philosophy. When officials start making judgments as to what is fair/not fair and using that as the basis for the calls they make, only bad things can happen.
Reply With Quote
  #72 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 01, 2013, 11:22am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,438
Simple Arithmetic ???

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
This should have been nothing, but was called a violation... I'm gonna let the incorrectly called violation stand rather than change it to an accidental whistle and give the ball back to A.
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny d View Post
This is never a good philosophy. When officials start making judgments as to what is fair/not fair and using that as the basis for the calls they make, only bad things can happen.
Agree. When I'm put into a position where I have to make another wrong to make the original wrong a right, I don't. I just suck it up and go with the rulebook. That way I only have to make one apology to a coach, athletic director, player, assignment commissioner, partner, etc., not two apologies.

Sometimes life isn't fair, and sometimes the rules of basketball aren't fair either.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

I was in prison and you came to visit me. (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by Adam; Sun Dec 01, 2013 at 11:38am. Reason: Stop it
Reply With Quote
  #73 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 01, 2013, 01:28pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnny d View Post
This is never a good philosophy. When officials start making judgments as to what is fair/not fair and using that as the basis for the calls they make, only bad things can happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
Agree. When I'm put into a position where I have to make another wrong to make the original wrong a right, I don't. I just suck it up and go with the rulebook. That way I only have to make one apology to a coach, athletic director, player, assignment commissioner, partner, etc., not two apologies.

Sometimes life isn't fair, and sometimes the rules of basketball aren't fair either.
And this is why the part is in front of the book about intent and purpose of the rules and a team not being given an advantage which is not intended by a rule. I don't believe it was intended to give the ball back to the wrong team because of an official's mistake. Sometimes it can't be helped. In this case it can.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #74 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 01, 2013, 02:18pm
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 22,438
Using Everything At Our Disposal ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
And this is why the part is in front of the book about intent and purpose of the rules and a team not being given an advantage which is not intended by a rule. I don't believe it was intended to give the ball back to the wrong team because of an official's mistake. Sometimes it can't be helped. In this case it can.
Good point, playing the old "intent and purpose" card.

But this is the part that concerned me, and maybe I was reading it wrong:

Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
I'm gonna let the incorrectly called violation stand rather than change it to an accidental whistle ...
I'm not unilaterally going to change the original violation call. I am going to get together with my partner, and the coaches, use 2-3, and the "intent and purpose of the rules", to come up with a correct decision, in line with all the rules in the rulebook, including the one that just another ref pointed out. I'm not going to make a second mistake, any followup to the first mistake will be by the book, the entire book, and nothing but the book, so help me God.
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

I was in prison and you came to visit me. (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Fri Dec 06, 2013 at 06:20pm.
Reply With Quote
  #75 (permalink)  
Old Sun Dec 01, 2013, 03:27pm
Stubborn Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Columbus, OH
Posts: 1,517
If possible, I always go with the rule book. If that means an inadvertent whistle, then so be it. By doing so I have solid reasons for my decision. By assuming things, I'm leaving myself open for more questions from coaches, observers, etc.

Here's what I say..

"I'm sorry, I made a mistake. By rule, this is how things go from there. I know it's not ideal, but it's the way things have to go."

Whoever I say that to many not be happy, but they can't argue against the rule book. At least not to me.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Team Control on Throw In Bishopcolle Basketball 7 Wed Nov 23, 2011 04:23pm
Team Control/Throw In After Made FG JW100 Basketball 26 Mon Feb 28, 2011 08:44am
Team Control during Throw in Remington Basketball 21 Fri Feb 11, 2011 05:59pm
Team control exception on throw ins Buckley11 Basketball 18 Fri Nov 04, 2005 08:47am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:38am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1