Illinois vs Michigan State Foul On Free Thrower (Video)

[Raymond]

B1 is whistled for a handcheck. A1 takes 2 more dribbles after the whistle and turns to pass the ball to the official. B1 knows the play is dead but attempts to knock the pass down and instead whacks A1 across the wrists.

Is that a tech?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

B1 is whistled for a handcheck. A1 takes 2 more dribbles after the whistle and turns to pass the ball to the official. B1 knows the play is dead but attempts to knock the pass down and instead whacks A1 across the wrists.

Is that a tech?

Not for dead ball contact. I see this action as constituting a normal foul if the ball had been live, and thus it is ignored BY RULE when it occurs during a dead ball.

Now will you please answer the question that I've asked you twice?

[Raymond]

No I'm not.

And in the play I submitted to you, I'm calling a T.

And I have no problem explaining it to a coach or supervisor. I had this debate with Jurassic when I first joined the board.

I err on the side of vigorously discouraging any unnecessary crap between players.

[Freddy]

Third one of the season yesterday. GV. Defensive player in upper block enters lane, proceeds backwards to displace FT shooter.
Shooter, "holding her pose" as the FT was in flight, buckled over from the "butt to the gut" illegal contact (actually lower than the shooter's gut, but then it wouldn't rhyme). Spurious charge of, "But she was boxing her out!" by defensive coach was laughable. Didn't need to check the monitor for this one. Wasn't a dead-ball technical.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

No I'm not.

And in the play I submitted to you, I'm calling a T.

And I have no problem explaining it to a coach or supervisor. I had this debate with Jurassic when I first joined the board.

I err on the side of vigorously discouraging any unnecessary crap between players.

So you are issuing technical fouls because you don't like someone's actions. You are on dangerous ground. I may not care for what a player or coach does, but my duty is to enforce the rules as written, and not impose my personal interpretation of justice. Unfortunately, that means that I have to let a few things go for which I might wish to issue a technical foul, but can't justify under dead-ball contact or unsporting behavior (non-contact).
The rules tell us that not all contact during a dead ball should be penalized with a technical foul. Quite clearly officials are to only penalize contact that is deemed intentional or flagrant, so I'm going to stick with that.
Sadly, you are having trouble answering the question I posed because you are reluctant to reconsider your long-held belief and come to terms with the fact that you've been acting incorrectly.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So you are issuing technical fouls because you don't like someone's actions.

Uh isn't that what we are supposed to do, use our judgement?

[Eastshire]

Originally Posted by AremRed

Uh isn't that what we are supposed to do, use our judgement?

No, we're supposed to apply the rules. BNR is ignoring the rules book definition of "intentional" and instead using it's common definition in order to justify Ts that aren't justified under the rules.

You cannot give a T because you don't like someone or their actions. They must actually commit an act that is punishable, by rule, with a technical foul.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

No, we're supposed to apply the rules. BNR is ignoring the rules book definition of "intentional" and instead using it's common definition in order to justify Ts that aren't justified under the rules.

You cannot give a T because you don't like someone or their actions. They must actually commit an act that is punishable, by rule, with a technical foul.

The rule for HS reads:

10-3 ART. 7
A player shall not:

Intentionally or flagrantly contacting an opponent when the ball is dead and such contact is not a personal foul.


Nowhere does that rule say that "Intentionally" is defined as the same contact that constitutes an Intentional foul.

But to play your "BNR is ignoring the rule" game, one definition of an Intentional foul is:

b. Contact away from the ball with an opponent who is clearly not involved with a play.

Once the ball is dead, the player contacted is obviously not involved in any play of any kind, so that contact can be deemed Intentional in my book.

Originally Posted by Eastshire

No, we're supposed to apply the rules. BNR is ignoring the rules book definition of "intentional" and instead using it's common definition in order to justify Ts that aren't justified under the rules.

You cannot give a T because you don't like someone or their actions. They must actually commit an act that is punishable, by rule, with a technical foul.

BNR is exercising his judgement that this contact well after the whistle is excessive, which per my reading of 4-19-3 he is well within his rights to do.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

So you are issuing technical fouls because you don't like someone's actions. You are on dangerous ground. I may not care for what a player or coach does, but my duty is to enforce the rules as written, and not impose my personal interpretation of justice. Unfortunately, that means that I have to let a few things go for which I might wish to issue a technical foul, but can't justify under dead-ball contact or unsporting behavior (non-contact).
The rules tell us that not all contact during a dead ball should be penalized with a technical foul. Quite clearly officials are to only penalize contact that is deemed intentional or flagrant, so I'm going to stick with that.
Sadly, you are having trouble answering the question I posed because you are reluctant to reconsider your long-held belief and come to terms with the fact that you've been acting incorrectly.

Sadly, I already answered your question at 9:51pm Eastern Time last night...trying more reading, and less posturing and lecturing. If you are going to command me to answer a question then take the time to read my answer which was right after your post from 9:29pm Eastern Time last night.

I'm fine with the ground I'm on. And yes, I call Techs on dead balls when players do something I deem detrimental to the good order and discipline of the game. You don't have to like it. Now, if you are ever my supervisor, I will adjust my thinking for those games which you assign me. Until then you'll just have to live with the travesty my way of thinking is rendering to the game.