NCAA Men's question

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by AremRed

I'm not. Called my first one this summer!

There's some case play to the effect of "penalize the entire act", so you need to get the T on this (and the T also serves as the warning).

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

there's some case play to the effect of "penalize the entire act", so you need to get the t on this (and the t also serves as the warning).

9.2.10 a

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

There's some case play to the effect of "penalize the entire act", so you need to get the T on this (and the T also serves as the warning).

I did! Men's rec, go figure.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BigCat

9.2.10 a

NFHS 9.2.10 SITUATION A: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through
the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hands. Team B has not been
warned previously for a throw-in plane infraction. RULING: B1 is charged with a
technical foul and it also results in the official having a team warning recorded
and reported to the head coach. COMMENT: In situations with the clock running
and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering
with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the
clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower’s efforts to
make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous
warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock
and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic. (4-
47-1; 10-1-5b, c; 10-3-10)

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

If it's a borderline call between PC and intentional in this particular end-of-game situation, I'd be inclined to err on the side of PC because of this rule.

Originally Posted by AremRed

Aha! I agree, stupid wording. Forgive me though if I use some common sense and disallow the basket when an airborne shooter karate-kicks a legal defender in the face after releasing the ball.

Nevada, La Rikardo and AremRed had basically the same opinion I did. Don't you have any vitriol for them, too?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Aha! I agree, stupid wording. Forgive me though if I use some common sense and disallow the basket when an airborne shooter karate-kicks a legal defender in the face after releasing the ball.

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

Wrong by the book, but I don't think you'll find anyone questioning you on the court.

Originally Posted by AremRed

Let's hope not.

As an evaluator you both would have a new tuchus hole if you didn't enforce the rule correctly.

MTD, Sr.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yes.

If the foul is after the release, the bucket counts if it goes in (or is awarded for BI or GT).

I don't have a men's book. Can you post the rules reference and the rule?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

I don't have a men's book. Can you post the rules reference and the rule?

The NCAA men's definition of player control does NOT include the airborne shooter. See 4-9

From the Case Book:
A.R. 158.
(Men) A1 drives for a layup. After the ball leaves A1’s hand but
before it goes through the basket, A1 charges into B1. A1’s try is
successful. Team B is not in the bonus. The out-of-bounds spot
nearest to where the personal foul occurred is on the end line. When the ball is handed to the thrower-in for Team B, may this
player move along the end line?
RULING: Yes. Since Team B is not in the bonus, designating a spot
is not necessary. Team B is permitted to put the ball in play from any
point out of bounds at the end line where the basket was scored since
Team A was credited with the score.
(Rule 7-4.6.a)


You can download the current NCAA book here for free: https://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4...all-rules.aspx

The 2015 NCAA Case Book is here: https://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4...case-book.aspx

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS 9.2.10 SITUATION A: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through
the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hands. Team B has not been
warned previously for a throw-in plane infraction. RULING: B1 is charged with a
technical foul and it also results in the official having a team warning recorded
and reported to the head coach. COMMENT: In situations with the clock running
and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering
with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the
clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower’s efforts to
make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous
warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock
and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic. (4-
47-1; 10-1-5b, c; 10-3-10)

I had a game in a shootout earlier this season where this almost came up. There was under 10 seconds left in the game and the coach of the team that was trailing (Down four I think) told me at the end of a timeout that if they scored immediately following the timeout, his team was going to reach through the plane and get a DoG warning. I was walking away so I just nodded, then this case play popped into my head and I realized I was going to ignore it if it came with under five seconds left, then I would have the explain to him why I didn't stop the clock and give the warning. Thankfully they didn't even score so it didn't come to that.