Violation: yes or no?

[westneat]

Originally Posted by Adam

They've tried to do this by interpretation. The problem is, interps fade over time. I'm already talking to veteran officials, association leadership, who are insisting that, by rule, the throwin that is tipped by A in the FC and recovered by A in the BC is a violation.

westneat is correct in that the rule itself has this as a violation: but the NFHS was clear when they added TC to the throw in that they did not want it to apply to anything except whether you shoot FTs on a given foul.

The need to change the TC rule back, and then simply change the penalties to state that a foul committed by the throw in team does not result in FTs. Maybe include that in the definition of a TC foul, even though there's no TC. This wouldn't be any different than a PC foul that can be charged even when there's no PC. I believe this was Bob's suggestion.

Worse, unless it's in the book, how can I justify a call that looks like it directly contradicts the rulebook?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by westneat

Worse, unless it's in the book, how can I justify a call that looks like it directly contradicts the rulebook?

You won't have to -- at least for a while.

This is one of the (rare) times when "what everyone knows" is correct.

Note that the NCAA rule is a little different -- the shot-clock starts when the ball is touched and when it gets to 20/25, it's a violation -- even if there was never PC in the BC. (generic statement only, for the usual situation; I recognize there are exceptions.) So, once people get used to that, then you might have some explaining to do, if FED doesn't clarify.

[Rob1968]

Unfortunately, the great majority of HS officials that I see, start the 10 second count upon the first touching of the ball, rather than control.

[CountTheBasket]

Did some men's "wreck" last night to try and make up a few dollars since my last FIVE HS games were cancelled. Had a play where white got a rebound and then lost the ball in transition still in the backcourt. A player from Red dove on the ground and had one hand firmly pinning the the ball to the ground near the mid-court line, but clearly in Red's frontcourt. He then put his other hand on the ground to push himself up, but put it down in the backcourt. I blew for a backcourt violation and then thought about this thread instantly and wondered if maybe I jumped the gun because it seemed to me the consensus here was that one hand pinning the ball to the ground is not control.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by CountTheBasket

Did some men's "wreck" last night to try and make up a few dollars since my last FIVE HS games were cancelled. Had a play where white got a rebound and then lost the ball in transition still in the backcourt. A player from Red dove on the ground and had one hand firmly pinning the the ball to the ground near the mid-court line, but clearly in Red's frontcourt. He then put his other hand on the ground to push himself up, but put it down in the backcourt. I blew for a backcourt violation and then thought about this thread instantly and wondered if maybe I jumped the gun because it seemed to me the consensus here was that one hand pinning the ball to the ground is not control.

I don't recall seeing anything "official" about whether pinning the ball to the ground was control. I suppose it depends on how you define "holding".

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't recall seeing anything "official" about whether pinning the ball to the ground was control. I suppose it depends on how you define "holding".

As the poster formerly known as Snaqwells would say, would you grant a time-out in this situation?

[CountTheBasket]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

As the poster formerly known as Snaqwells would say, would you grant a time-out in this situation?

In this scenario, yes. It was men's rec so there weren't bodies diving all over, the player was all alone on the ground with the ball pinned, if he looked at me and asked for timeout I would've granted. Great way to look at it, looks like that means it was a correct whistle.