Endgame controversy in No VA

[APG]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

For those who have asked whether this would’ve been just as egregious if the play was at the end of any of the other three quarters: yes it would because it involved kicking a rule. The only difference is they might have been able to get themselves out of it, especially if it happened at the end of the 2nd quarter since they would’ve had a ten-minute intermission to figure things out.

If you're talking about them taking the point off the board when they come back, they (for whatever reason according to NFHS) wouldn't be able to correct the mistake. Now whether they would follow this interpretation or "do the right thing" is a different matter...

NFHS 2010-2011 Interpretations

SITUATION 1: Three-tenths of a second remain on the clock in the second quarter. A1’s throw-in is “caught” by A2, released on a try, and the officials count the basket. The coaches do not protest, the officials do not confer and all participants head to their respective locker rooms. Upon returning to the court with three minutes remaining in the intermission, the opposing coach asks the officials if the basket should have counted since the ball was clearly caught and released with three-tenths of a second on the clock. The officials realize their error at this point. RULING: The goal counts; this is not a correctable-error situation as described in Rule 2-10. (2-10; 5-2-5)

[RookieDude]

Originally Posted by APG

NFHS 2010-2011 Interpretations

SITUATION 1: ....The coaches do not protest...

And there it is...I do not know if the Coach protested or not in this OP...

but, again, if there is a proper protest...our State Powers will look at it and determine what should be done. (if anything)

(regardless if johnny d thinks it is silly or not)

[ODog]

Originally Posted by APG

If you're talking about them taking the point off the board when they come back, they (for whatever reason according to NFHS) wouldn't be able to correct the mistake. Now whether they would follow this interpretation or "do the right thing" is a different matter...

NFHS 2010-2011 Interpretations

SITUATION 1: Three-tenths of a second remain on the clock in the second quarter. A1’s throw-in is “caught” by A2, released on a try, and the officials count the basket. The coaches do not protest, the officials do not confer and all participants head to their respective locker rooms. Upon returning to the court with three minutes remaining in the intermission, the opposing coach asks the officials if the basket should have counted since the ball was clearly caught and released with three-tenths of a second on the clock. The officials realize their error at this point. RULING: The goal counts; this is not a correctable-error situation as described in Rule 2-10. (2-10; 5-2-5)

I can't believe that was ever an interpretation. That is absolutely a CE and well within the window.

I know (hope) everyone here would "do the right thing."

[RookieDude]

Does this interp tell us that "control" is a judgement call?

...Not a "rule" being inadvertently set aside?

It is the only thing I can come up with as to why it is not a CE...or why the powers that be in Virginia would/could not hear a protest concerning the OP.

Something to think about.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by RookieDude

Does this interp tell us that "control" is a judgement call?

...Not a "rule" being inadvertently set aside?

It is the only thing I can come up with as to why it is not a CE...or why the powers that be in Virginia would/could not hear a protest concerning the OP.

Something to think about.

That is the only way I can reconcile this case play.