throw-in/goaltending

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

This is an example of basket interference.

Casebook: 9.11.2:

Since it is a violation for thrower A1 to throw the ball directly ito the basket from out of bounds, what happens if B1 touches the throw-in pass while the ball is in the cylinder above A's basket? RULING: B1 is charged with basket interference and a two-point goal is scored. Team B is awarded the ball for a throw-in anywhere along the end lines as after a scored goal except the official shall place the ball at the disposal of a player of Team B for a throw-in from any point outside the end line.

Ok, fine, I admit it, I did not realize that BI does not specify a try, I would've messed this one up. That said, why in the hell do the rules allow this to happen???? Is this simply an oversight that has never been changed/addressed, or is there a purpose for this ruling?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by frezer11

Ok, fine, I admit it, I did not realize that BI does not specify a try, I would've messed this one up. That said, why in the hell do the rules allow this to happen???? Is this simply an oversight that has never been changed/addressed, or is there a purpose for this ruling?

This is a good example of: You penalize them for their ignorance.

Teach your kids the rules, coaches. They should know better than to commit basket interference any time. (there is nothing I admire more than seeing a player who obviously pulls his hand(s) back and waits for the ball to clear the cylinder before grabbing it) They really should know better than to do it in this case.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by frezer11

Casebook: 9.11.2:

Since it is a violation for thrower A1 to throw the ball directly ito the basket from out of bounds, what happens if B1 touches the throw-in pass while the ball is in the cylinder above A's basket? RULING: B1 is charged with basket interference and a two-point goal is scored. Team B is awarded the ball for a throw-in anywhere along the end lines as after a scored goal except the official shall place the ball at the disposal of a player of Team B for a throw-in from any point outside the end line.

Ok, fine, I admit it, I did not realize that BI does not specify a try, I would've messed this one up. That said, why in the hell do the rules allow this to happen???? Is this simply an oversight that has never been changed/addressed, or is there a purpose for this ruling?

After reading your other posts in other threads I get the feeling that you are a young official who does not have a good grasp of Rule 4 nor do you have grasp how different rules interact with each other.

I don't understand why you have a problem with the definitions of Throw-in, Field Goal Attempt, Baske Interference, and Goaltending and how these rules interact?

MTD, Sr.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

After reading your other posts in other threads I get the feeling that you are a young official who does not have a good grasp of Rule 4 nor do you have grasp how different rules interact with each other.

I don't understand why you have a problem with the definitions of Throw-in, Field Goal Attempt, Baske Interference, and Goaltending and how these rules interact?

MTD, Sr.

I don't think that I do have a problem with those definitions, though I admit I've never considered BI as a possibility on a throw in. I misspoke for the sake of avoiding a drawn out explanation earlier when I said "I did not realize that BI does not specify a try..." because I do know its possible on, say, a skip-pass scenario. Again, I hadn't considered it on a throw in, and even though it's clearly a case play which I quoted earlier, I must've just not processed that one while reading the book.

My complaint is not that I won't call or apply the rules as written, but my question is why that definition is worded the way it is. It seems to go against my intuition that points can be scored in this manner, and to go back to my initial question, is there a purpose for this ruling?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Basket Interference (BI) and Goaltending (GT) are violations that involve the Ball. I will discuss BI first, then GT (not involving FTs), and then GT involving FTs.


BI applies to a Live Ball that is:

a) IN,

b) ON the Basket, or

c) IN or TOUCHING the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring.

The BI Rule does not care how or what caused the Ball to be in (a), (b), or (c). The BI Rule only cares about the Ball being touched while it is in (a), (b), or (c).


GT also applies to a Live Ball, but to a Live Ball during a FGA (including a Tap) that is:

a) on its way downward flight,

b) entirely above the Basket Ring,

c) has a chance the possibility of the Basket in flight.


A special note to Frezer11, as you can see there really is a difference between BI and GT and why they are different.


(With apologies to Monty Python.) And now for something completely different. GT of a FT is an completely different situation. And the Rule goes back to the early 1980's when the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees changed the FT to allow players in Spaces along the FT Lane to enter the FT Lane after the Ball was released by the FT Shooter during his/her FT Attempt.

The Rules Committees soon realized that a very quick Defender could enter the FT Lane after the Shooter and released the Ball and block the FT Attempt before it had started its downward flight.

The Rules Committees revised the definition of GT to include a Defender (not a teammate of the FT Shooter) touching the Ball after the FT Shooter had released the Ball and before the Ball entered the Imaginary Cyinder above the Basket Ring, as well made it a TF charged to the Defender that committed the GT.

The NFHS Rules Committee never changed the definition of GT when it reverted back to the old rule that prevented the players in the Spaces along the FT Lane from entering the FT Lane until the Ball had touched the Backboard or Basket. And now that Players in the Spaces along the FT Lane can enter the FT Lane after the Ball is released by the FT Shooter, the GT of a FT Rule has some relevance.

MTD, Sr.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Basket Interference (BI) and Goaltending (GT) are violations that involve the Ball. I will discuss BI first, then GT (not involving FTs), and then GT involving FTs.


BI applies to a Live Ball that is:

a) IN,

b) ON the Basket, or

c) IN or TOUCHING the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring.

The BI Rule does not care how or what caused the Ball to be in (a), (b), or (c). The BI Rule only cares about the Ball being touched while it is in (a), (b), or (c).


GT also applies to a Live Ball, but to a Live Ball during a FGA (including a Tap) that is:

a) on its way downward flight,

b) entirely above the Basket Ring,

c) has a chance the possibility of the Basket in flight.


A special note to Frezer11, as you can see there really is a difference between BI and GT and why they are different.


(With apologies to Monty Python.) And now for something completely different. GT of a FT is an completely different situation. And the Rule goes back to the early 1980's when the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees changed the FT to allow players in Spaces along the FT Lane to enter the FT Lane after the Ball was released by the FT Shooter during his/her FT Attempt.

The Rules Committees soon realized that a very quick Defender could enter the FT Lane after the Shooter and released the Ball and block the FT Attempt before it had started its downward flight.

The Rules Committees revised the definition of GT to include a Defender (not a teammate of the FT Shooter) touching the Ball after the FT Shooter had released the Ball and before the Ball entered the Imaginary Cyinder above the Basket Ring, as well made it a TF charged to the Defender that committed the GT.

The NFHS Rules Committee never changed the definition of GT when it reverted back to the old rule that prevented the players in the Spaces along the FT Lane from entering the FT Lane until the Ball had touched the Backboard or Basket. And now that Players in the Spaces along the FT Lane can enter the FT Lane after the Ball is released by the FT Shooter, the GT of a FT Rule has some relevance.

MTD, Sr.

I thank you for posting this, and I don't want to sound unappreciative or arrogant, but I really think I do have a pretty solid understanding of those differences. My question is not the interpretation of the rule, but rather why the rule exists the way that it does. I get why basket interference exists on a pass, but why is BI possible when a field goal is not? Is there a reason the rule includes a throw in rather than excluding that scenario?

[mutantducky]

? I guess simply because you can't make a basket from a throw-in. So it has to be BI and not goaltending

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Basket Interference (BI) and Goaltending (GT) are violations that involve the Ball. I will discuss BI first, then GT (not involving FTs), and then GT involving FTs.


BI applies to a Live Ball that is:

a) IN,

b) ON the Basket, or

c) IN or TOUCHING the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring.

The BI Rule does not care how or what caused the Ball to be in (a), (b), or (c). The BI Rule only cares about the Ball being touched while it is in (a), (b), or (c).


GT also applies to a Live Ball, but to a Live Ball during a FGA (including a Tap) that is:

a) on its way downward flight,

b) entirely above the Basket Ring,

c) has a chance the possibility of the Basket in flight.


A special note to Frezer11, as you can see there really is a difference between BI and GT and why they are different.


(With apologies to Monty Python.) And now for something completely different. GT of a FT is an completely different situation. And the Rule goes back to the early 1980's when the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees changed the FT to allow players in Spaces along the FT Lane to enter the FT Lane after the Ball was released by the FT Shooter during his/her FT Attempt.

The Rules Committees soon realized that a very quick Defender could enter the FT Lane after the Shooter and released the Ball and block the FT Attempt before it had started its downward flight.

The Rules Committees revised the definition of GT to include a Defender (not a teammate of the FT Shooter) touching the Ball after the FT Shooter had released the Ball and before the Ball entered the Imaginary Cyinder above the Basket Ring, as well made it a TF charged to the Defender that committed the GT.

The NFHS Rules Committee never changed the definition of GT when it reverted back to the old rule that prevented the players in the Spaces along the FT Lane from entering the FT Lane until the Ball had touched the Backboard or Basket. And now that Players in the Spaces along the FT Lane can enter the FT Lane after the Ball is released by the FT Shooter, the GT of a FT Rule has some relevance.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by frezer11

I thank you for posting this, and I don't want to sound unappreciative or arrogant, but I really think I do have a pretty solid understanding of those differences. My question is not the interpretation of the rule, but rather why the rule exists the way that it does. I get why basket interference exists on a pass, but why is BI possible when a field goal is not? Is there a reason the rule includes a throw in rather than excluding that scenario?

frezer11:

Without discussing GT of FTA:

NFHS R1-S10-A1 defines the Basket. By adding the Imaginary Cylinder to R1-S1-A1 we now have the basis for BI. As I have stated before, the BI Rule does NOT care how or what caused a Live Ball to be in or touching the Basket Ring, or touching the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring.

GT applies the a Live Ball is outside the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring during a FTA subject to the criteria I listed in my recent post.


The definitions of BI and GT are quite specific. I don't understand you question.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by frezer11

I get why basket interference exists on a pass, but why is BI possible when a field goal is not?

Exactly. Chalk one up to FIBA rules for having some common sense I guess.

[mutantducky]

this may be a bit hard to see. But for NFHS would you call BI here?
http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=400578852

15 second mark, Suns player hits the net. Mike Conley spots it. Also looks like the refs had different calls at the 55 mark, the And 1 play by Marc Gasol. Unless the commentary is wrong.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

NFHS would you call BI here? Suns player hits the net.

Tough call. The ball may have been bouncing above the ring when the net was touched, and if so, no basket interference.