Casebook play - pushing foul on rebounded while shot is in the air

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

He didn't have a particular reason. He just thought it should be the other team's ball for a throw-in. I explained the whole concept about how there was no team control, therefore, you shoot bonus if the foul count warrants it. He was just having a rough night. Or at least his team was. It happened to be his player's 4th foul, and he didn't sub the kid out. When his team got the ball back after the FTs, that same player attempted a shot at the other end of the floor, missed, and then went right through an opponent trying to get to the rebound and sent the opponent right to the floor. Yeah, that was number 5 on said player. Game over for him before halftime. He actually came out for the second half in street clothes to watch the remainder of the game.

I would have just said, "Coach, we're in the bonus. I don't understand why you don't think we should be shooting. What am I missing?"

Put it on him to explain why you shouldn't be shooting.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

I would have just said, "Coach, we're in the bonus. I don't understand why you don't think we should be shooting. What am I missing?"

Put it on him to explain why you shouldn't be shooting.

Some coaches just think that multiple bad things can't happen at once, especially not to their team. Earlier this year, BV, 3 point shot in the air, A1 shoves B1 underneath. Shot is good. A's ball. Coach B was incredulous. "No way do they get the basket and the ball!" This coach was significantly younger than I am, but certainly old enough to know better than this.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This coach was significantly younger than I am, but certainly old enough to know better than this.

In my world, all the coaches are significantly younger than me. Maybe that's why they don't often challenge me. They figure that the guy with the gray hair, who's been around the block several times, and who has attended a lot of rodeos, knows more about the rules than they do. Sometimes being old is good thing, not often, but sometimes. Am I right, Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Some coaches just think that multiple bad things can't happen at once, especially not to their team. Earlier this year, BV, 3 point shot in the air, A1 shoves B1 underneath. Shot is good. A's ball. Coach B was incredulous. "No way do they get the basket and the ball!" This coach was significantly younger than I am, but certainly old enough to know better than this.

"Coach, this isn't football, they don't have to decline the penalty to keep the score."

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

"Coach, this isn't football, they don't have to decline the penalty to keep the score."

I find it disturbing when a "veteran" coach doesn't know a fundamental rule. A few years ago a GV coach who had been around a long time (she's since retired) assured me that on a throw-in the thrower could not jump up and return to the floor. I offered to bet her double or nothing on the game fee.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

I find it disturbing when a "veteran" coach doesn't know a fundamental rule. A few years ago a GV coach who had been around a long time (she's since retired) assured me that on a throw-in the thrower could not jump up and return to the floor. I offered to bet her double or nothing on the game fee.

Watching the game before mine this year, and the visitors' varsity coach was sitting behind the bench commenting on the game. V had the ball in the FC and threw it into the BC, V1 followed the ball and waited (I really don't know why they do this) until the H player got close before touching it and getting the BC call. The officials started to put the ball in play at the spot of the violation (where it was touched) and the V coach kept chirping from behind the bench that it should be at half court.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Adam

Watching the game before mine this year, and the visitors' varsity coach was sitting behind the bench commenting on the game. V had the ball in the FC and threw it into the BC, V1 followed the ball and waited (I really don't know why they do this) until the H player got close before touching it and getting the BC call. The officials started to put the ball in play at the spot of the violation (where it was touched) and the V coach kept chirping from behind the bench that it should be at half court.

A lot of officials would back him up on that one.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A lot of officials would back him up on that one.

The guys on that game did.

We talked to them at half time.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

V had the ball in the FC and threw it into the BC, V1 followed the ball and waited (I really don't know why they do this) until the H player got close before touching it and getting the BC call.

I know why they do this.

V1 thinks that he can immediately steal the ball as soon a H touches it, thus avoiding the backcourt violation and maintaining control of the ball.

I have never seen this work. In fifty years of basketball as a player, coach, fan , and official, I have never, ever, seen this work.

In a few cases I have seen H just grab the ball, and go in for a layup, with V1 having to foul H.

In most cases V1, after a second, or two, just decides that this maneuver just isn't going to work and touches the ball for the backcourt violation, moving the throwin a bit closer to the basket than if he had just touched it as soon as possible for the violation.

Nothing good ever comes from the maneuver. Never ever.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I know why they do this.

V1 thinks that he can immediately steal the ball as soon a H touches it, thus avoiding the backcourt violation and maintaining control of the ball.

I have never seen this work. In fifty years of basketball as a player, coach, fan , and official, I have never, ever, seen this work. In a few cases I have seen H just grab the ball, and go in for a layup, with V1 having to foul H.

In most cases V1, after a second, or two, just decides that this maneuver just isn't going to work and touches the ball for the backcourt violation, moving the throwin a bit closer to the basket than if he had just touched it as soon as possible for the violation.

Nothing good ever comes from the maneuver. Never ever.

This would make sense if he waited til H actually touched it. I've never seen them wait that long. I always see them wait til the defense gets close, then the offense touches it first to prevent the fast break. You'd think if this was the thought process, at least one kid would try it.

[Kelvin green]

Originally Posted by Adam

Watching the game before mine this year, and the visitors' varsity coach was sitting behind the bench commenting on the game. V had the ball in the FC and threw it into the BC, V1 followed the ball and waited (I really don't know why they do this) until the H player got close before touching it and getting the BC call. The officials started to put the ball in play at the spot of the violation (where it was touched) and the V coach kept chirping from behind the bench that it should be at half court.

My response.

You're right coach, there are 30 arenas where that is the rule, but we're not in one of them.

This is a good reason to understand NCAA and NBA rules... The more we understand the other rule sets, the better perspective we might get.