The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   USC-UCLA Basket Interference? (Video) (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/99058-usc-ucla-basket-interference-video.html)

frezer11 Wed Jan 14, 2015 10:42pm

USC-UCLA Basket Interference? (Video)
 
At the 8:40 mark of the 2nd there seems to be a pretty clear-cut BI that doesn't get called. Anyone see that? If an admin could find a clip, I'd appreciate it, thanks!

APG Sun Jan 18, 2015 04:51am

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/o3GbXz7J4eE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

AremRed Sun Jan 18, 2015 05:43am

Basket interference.

Camron Rust Sun Jan 18, 2015 05:51am

Quote:

Originally Posted by AremRed (Post 950807)
Basket interference.

Agree.

BillyMac Sun Jan 18, 2015 06:50am

Tough Call In Real Time ...
 
Is the ball in the air (in the cylinder above the rim) when the net is touched? If so, nothing.

Camron Rust Sun Jan 18, 2015 01:28pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 950816)
Is the ball in the air (in the cylinder above the rim) when the net is touched? If so, nothing.

Unless the basket was pulled down such that it had not returned to its normal position by the time the ball did contact the rim. That is what I have.

crosscountry55 Sun Jan 18, 2015 01:48pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 950897)
Unless the basket was pulled down such that it had not returned to its normal position by the time the ball did contact the rim. That is what I have.

Well, there is the whole "moving a moveable ring" aspect of BI, but I don't think that's in play here. Technically, merely touching the net while the ball is on or in the basket is BI.

In practicality, I'm fine with the no call for three reasons:

1. The ball is not affected (which I think is what Camron was implying).
2. Unless the ball is rolling around on the rim (which it was not in this case), deciding whether the net was being touched at the precise moment the ball was on the rim is an educated guess at best.
3. It's tough to trace the arm you see touching the net down to the jersey color amidst the chaos of rebounding. You could conceivably put air in the whistle and then say to yourself, "crap, who was that?" And then you're guessing when awarded points are potentially involved, and that's not good.

In summary, good no call IMO.

BillyMac Sun Jan 18, 2015 01:54pm

It's A Rule ??? Right ??? What ?? Wait A Minute ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by crosscountry55 (Post 950903)
It's tough to trace the arm you see touching the net down to the jersey color amidst the chaos of rebounding. You could conceivably put air in the whistle and then say to yourself, "crap, who was that?" And then you're guessing ...

You don't have to guess. Just call double basket interference. And be sure to sell the hell out of the call, get out of Dodge, and get the ball back in play, as soon as possible.

crosscountry55 Sun Jan 18, 2015 02:03pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 950905)
You don't have to guess. Just call double basket interference. And be sure to sell the hell out of the call, get out of Dodge, and get the ball back in play, as soon as possible.

Ha! Actually I thought of that.....but then we have to go to the arrow, and someone will want clarification on why we went to the arrow, and the next time there's a jump ball they'll say, "see, that would have been our arrow," yada yada yada. :D

Camron Rust Sun Jan 18, 2015 02:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by crosscountry55 (Post 950903)
Well, there is the whole "moving a moveable ring" aspect of BI, but I don't think that's in play here.

That is exactly what happened. It wan't for long, but the basket was pulled down and it popped up to hit the ball...and #44 blue is the one who did it.

There are a few clues to telling that it was pulled down instead of just being touched....
1. The whole backboard support system dipped.
2. The net recoiled straight up into the cylinder which means it was pulled, not merely touched.

Basket should have counted.

BillyMac Sun Jan 18, 2015 02:11pm

Sharp Eyes ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 950907)
It wasn't for long, but the basket was pulled down and it popped up to hit the ball, and #44 blue is the one who did it.

It took me three slow motion replays to see it, but you're absolutely correct.

Good luck seeing this in a real game, in real time.

BillyMac Sun Jan 18, 2015 02:15pm

Rock, Paper, Scissors ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 950905)
... double basket interference.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crosscountry55 (Post 950906)
... then we have to go to the arrow,

Are you sure this is the correct penalty for double basket interference? See 9-14-PENALTY.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Sun Jan 18, 2015 02:44pm

I don't see BI in the video. And now for something completely different: I thought the shooter might have been fouled at the beginning of the video.

MTD, Sr.

crosscountry55 Sun Jan 18, 2015 03:04pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 950910)
Are you sure this is the correct penalty for double basket interference? See 9-14-PENALTY.

There is no section 14 to Rule 9 in NFHS.

See NFHS 6-4-3e and NCAAM 9-18-5.

frezer11 Sun Jan 18, 2015 03:26pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by crosscountry55 (Post 950903)
Well, there is the whole "moving a moveable ring" aspect of BI, but I don't think that's in play here. Technically, merely touching the net while the ball is on or in the basket is BI.

In practicality, I'm fine with the no call for three reasons:

1. The ball is not affected (which I think is what Camron was implying).
2. Unless the ball is rolling around on the rim (which it was not in this case), deciding whether the net was being touched at the precise moment the ball was on the rim is an educated guess at best.
3. It's tough to trace the arm you see touching the net down to the jersey color amidst the chaos of rebounding. You could conceivably put air in the whistle and then say to yourself, "crap, who was that?" And then you're guessing when awarded points are potentially involved, and that's not good.

In summary, good no call IMO.

I think the ball is very clearly affected. If you just watch the ball itself, when it hits the backboard and then rim, it bounces unnaturally high. I don't know what else could possible cause this except that the rim had been moved, which does affect the ball.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 950907)
That is exactly what happened. It wan't for long, but the basket was pulled down and it popped up to hit the ball...and #44 blue is the one who did it.

There are a few clues to telling that it was pulled down instead of just being touched....
1. The whole backboard support system dipped.
2. The net recoiled straight up into the cylinder which means it was pulled, not merely touched.

Basket should have counted.

In addition to those you listed, if you watch the video with sound, you can clearly hear the sound of the rim popping back to its initial position.

BillyMac Sun Jan 18, 2015 03:33pm

Shame On Me ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by crosscountry55 (Post 950916)
See NFHS 6-4-3e

https://sp.yimg.com/ib/th?id=HN.6080...4&pid=15.1&P=0

I was only kidding about "double" basket interference. I didn't realize that there was a real simultaneous basket interference rule.

I hope that this doesn't cost me my Esteemed Forum Member status. It took me ten years, and 13,000 posts, to achieve this status. I don't want to lose it because of one stupid joke that backfired on me.

NFHS 6-4-3-E: Alternating-possession throw-ins shall be from the out-of bounds spot nearest to where the ball was located. An alternating possession throw-in shall result when: Opponents commit simultaneous goaltending or basket-interference violations.

If the ball went in the basket, should the basket count, or not? If the ball didn't go in the basket, should the basket be awarded, or not?

Once we get those questions answered, we can move on to a multiple basket interference situation. Award, or wave off, double the points? Right?

Camron Rust Sun Jan 18, 2015 04:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 950909)
It took me three slow motion replays to see it, but you're absolutely correct.

Good luck seeing this in a real game, in real time.

Sometimes, we can't see the specific act at full speed but we can see clues that reveal the act. Primarily, the sound that someone else mentioned (I was watching the video with no sound), and the reaction of the net, it responded like a rubber band being shot. That tells you it was grabbed, pulled down, and released. Then, seeing the ball pop up unnaturally completes the puzzle.

crosscountry55 Sun Jan 18, 2015 06:58pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 950920)
Sometimes, we can't see the specific act at full speed but we can see clues that reveal the act. Primarily, the sound that someone else mentioned (I was watching the video with no sound), and the reaction of the net, it responded like a rubber band being shot. That tells you it was grabbed, pulled down, and released. Then, seeing the ball pop up unnaturally completes the puzzle.

You know, I stand by the points I made earlier, but after watching the video a lot more and listening to the sound, I agree it's definitely BI. The ball was affected. Even with the video I'm still not 100% sure whose arm got the net, but I think it was probably white. So UCLA should have been awarded two points there.

Golly gee that's a tough call in real time. As if your everyday vanilla BI is any easier. Sheesh.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:28pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1