Ask the Ref?

Game is 14 points with 2 minutes to go. During dead ball, people begin to leave. Because of traffic, they are interfering with the attempt to put the ball in play. Without announcement or warning, a technical foul is given to the home team. 2 FT and a 3 pointer later, the game is down to 9 points. The home team won by 9. What is the proper protocol for a situation such as this? What is to stop the fans of the visiting team to intentionally create a situation like this if trailing?
 
Curious One said:
Game is 14 points with 2 minutes to go. During dead ball, people begin to leave. Because of traffic, they are interfering with the attempt to put the ball in play. Without announcement or warning, a technical foul is given to the home team. 2 FT and a 3 pointer later, the game is down to 9 points. The home team won by 9. What is the proper protocol for a situation such as this? What is to stop the fans of the visiting team to intentionally create a situation like this if trailing?
Click to expand...
First of all, sounds like the gym has a layout problem if departing spectators are interfering with play.

Secondly, under no circumstances should the crew have whacked the home team for this. Either wait for the fans to clear out or ask game management to hold them up so the game can conclude.
 
Curious One said:
Game is 14 points with 2 minutes to go. During dead ball, people begin to leave. Because of traffic, they are interfering with the attempt to put the ball in play. Without announcement or warning, a technical foul is given to the home team. 2 FT and a 3 pointer later, the game is down to 9 points. The home team won by 9. What is the proper protocol for a situation such as this? What is to stop the fans of the visiting team to intentionally create a situation like this if trailing?
Click to expand...
I hope this is a hypothetical situation.
 
First time seeing a play tonight.

Defensive player lost (or took off) his shoe and blocked a 3 point attempt with it.

Officials called a technical. Since I never seen anything like it, it seems like the shot should have counted basically as goaltending.

Did the officials get this right?
 
Yappi said:
First time seeing a play tonight.

Defensive player lost (or took off) his shoe and blocked a 3 point attempt with it.

Officials called a technical. Since I never seen anything like it, it seems like the shot should have counted basically as goaltending.

Did the officials get this right?
Click to expand...
Yes.... While it's not specifically listed in the rule book, this is akin to climbing or lifting a player to secure greater height, which is specifically prohibited int he rule book. This falls under Rule 2-3 - "The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

This does not meet the definition of goal tending or basket interference.
 
A player attempts a shot from the wing that is deflected by a defender but hits the backboard before another defender slaps it out of bounds. Does the initial deflection negate what would normally have been a goaltending call?
 
serpico said:
A player attempts a shot from the wing that is deflected by a defender but hits the backboard before another defender slaps it out of bounds. Does the initial deflection negate what would normally have been a goaltending call?
Click to expand...
No. If the ball still had an opportunity to go in, the restrictions are still in place.

That said, the ball hitting the backboard does not preclude the second defender legally contacting the ball. If the ball was still going up and was not inside the imaginary cylinder, that contact is legal.
 
AllSports12 said:
Yes.... While it's not specifically listed in the rule book, this is akin to climbing or lifting a player to secure greater height, which is specifically prohibited int he rule book. This falls under Rule 2-3 - "The referee shall make decisions on any points not specifically covered in the rules."

This does not meet the definition of goal tending or basket interference.
Click to expand...
So there is some leeway for the officials to call the shot good? In this instance, several of us felt that the technical foul only giving two shots was insufficient when the illegal use of equipment stopped a 3-pointer.

* just for clarity, my home team was the offending team.

Here is the video for those interested:
 
Yappi said:
So there is some leeway for the officials to call the shot good? In this instance, several of us felt that the technical foul only giving two shots was insufficient when the illegal use of equipment stopped a 3-pointer.

* just for clarity, my home team was the offending team.

Here is the video for those interested:
Click to expand...
You're only looking at the 2 free throws. They also got the ball back after the free throws.......I'd say that's better overall than the 3 pointer. Espeically when the 3 pointer probably only had a 25% chance of going in.....
 
Very simple question...

In the REGULAR SEASON, even though there's only 15 spaces in the scorebook, you can put more than 15 players in the scorebook, correct???
 
Had this one over the weekend. A1 driving in for what appears to be a layup attempt. While airborne, he is illegally contacted by B1 for a blocking foul. After the contact and the whistle but while still airborne, A1 passes the ball to a player at the free throw line. Shooting foul or spot foul?
 
oxat622 said:
Had this one over the weekend. A1 driving in for what appears to be a layup attempt. While airborne, he is illegally contacted by B1 for a blocking foul. After the contact and the whistle but while still airborne, A1 passes the ball to a player at the free throw line. Shooting foul or spot foul?
Click to expand...
Could be either. This is a "had to be there" situation.

If you judge the player met the definition of a try when they were fouled, award two shots. If you judge no attempt was made, we have a common foul and the ball out of bounds nearest the spot where the foul occurred.

Don't mistake the player going airborne as an automatic attmept for a goal..... then again, don't penalize him by not awarding FTA's simply because he passed the ball after he was fouled.

In other words, you get to earn your game check on this one ;)
 
New one for me, team a is inbounding at their baseline throws to teammate in front court who touches the ball and it goes into the back court where he retrieves it. Official called over and back. I didn’t think this was correct as there wasn’t team control in front court. Can you provide clarity on this ?
 
shadow1479 said:
New one for me, team a is inbounding at their baseline throws to teammate in front court who touches the ball and it goes into the back court where he retrieves it. Official called over and back. I didn’t think this was correct as there wasn’t team control in front court. Can you provide clarity on this ?
Click to expand...
You are correct.....

On a throw in, the division line is ignored until the throwing team posseses (controls) the ball in the front court. The situation you describe and the situation where the teammate of the thrower jumps from the front court, catches the ball in the air, and lands in the back court are two common plays were officials, coaches, and fans incorrectly think a violation has occurred.
 
Interesting problem over the weekend. Player kneeling at the table checking in. Live ball comes near the table and he reaches out and touches it. The official called a technical foul on him for an unsportsmanlike act. As an official, his question was whether the head coach should have got an indirect technical as still being part of the bench (he had reported in - waiting for the dead ball).
 
Dragon72 said:
Interesting problem over the weekend. Player kneeling at the table checking in. Live ball comes near the table and he reaches out and touches it. The official called a technical foul on him for an unsportsmanlike act. As an official, his question was whether the head coach should have got an indirect technical as still being part of the bench (he had reported in - waiting for the dead ball).
Click to expand...
Since he had not legally entered the game, he is, by rule, bench personnel. The Head Coach should be issued an indirect technical foul and lose his coaching box privileges.

One question......

Was the ball going out of bounds with no other player reasonably able to stop it?
 
Dragon72 said:
I will try and obtain further information at our chapter meeting tonite.
Click to expand...
Reason why I ask is this..... If no player is in the immediate area and nobody is making an attempt to prevent the ball from going out of bounds.....

A simple "don't do that, it may cost you dearly some day" could be in order.
 
To clarify the play. I asked the officials involved. The other team had a chance to recover the loose ball near the sideline but the player checking in reached out and touched it before the other team could get to it
 
Dragon72 said:
To clarify the play. I asked the officials involved. The other team had a chance to recover the loose ball near the sideline but the player checking in reached out and touched it before the other team could get to it
Click to expand...
Easy technical foul.....

And as you noted correctly prior, it should be charged indirectly to the Head Coach.
 
I am our official scorekeeper and this is a situation that happened in the JV game tonight...

Team B has a throw-in to begin the 2nd quarter. Team B commits a 5-second violation, so it then becomes Team A's ball.

When and under what circumstances does the possession arrow get switched? There was considerable debate about this in the moment and especially at halftime. For what it's worth, there was never a held ball for the remainder of the 1st half.

If you could cite the specific rule, it would help me understand the situation. Thanks.
 
Last edited:
Ericles said:
I am our official scorekeeper and this is a situation that happened in the JV game tonight...

Team B has a throw-in to begin the 2nd quarter. Team B commits a 5-second violation, so it then becomes Team A's ball.

When and under what circumstances does the possession arrow get switched? There was considerable debate about this in the moment and especially at halftime. For what it's worth, there was never a held ball for the remainder of the 1st half.

If you could cite the specific rule, it would help me understand the situation. Thanks.
Click to expand...
A confusing rule for many (including officials :mad:)........ and for really no good reason.

- If A violates during the throw-in, they lose the ball and the arrow
- If B violates during the throw-in, A keeps the ball and the arrow (the new throw-in is no longer an AP throw-in)
- If either team fouls during the throw-in, the arrow remains the same




Rule 6-4-5 (your scenario is bolded)

The opportunity to make an alternating-possession throw-in is lost if the throw-in team violates. If either team fouls during an alternating possession throw-in, it does not cause the throw-in team to lose the possession arrow. If the defensive team commits a violation during the throw-in, the possession arrow is not switched.
 
Defender attempts to tip the ball away from the dribbler and makes contact with the dribbler's hand but does not touch the ball. The ball goes out of bounds. Since the defender has never touched the ball, does the dribbler's team lose possession?
 
HoopsFan1 said:
Defender attempts to tip the ball away from the dribbler and makes contact with the dribbler's hand but does not touch the ball. The ball goes out of bounds. Since the defender has never touched the ball, does the dribbler's team lose possession?
Click to expand...
By rule, (4-24-2 & 10-7-2) yes..... as long as the ball was in contact with the dribbler's hands and that contact by the defender was incidental to an attempt to play the ball.
 
AllSports12 said:
By rule, (4-24-2 & 10-7-2) yes..... as long as the ball was in contact with the dribbler's hands and that contact by the defender was incidental to an attempt to play the ball.
Click to expand...
I understand making contact with the dribbler's hand is not a foul. I cannot find in the rule book where it explicitly says possession goes to the defender's team since no contact was made with the ball (only the hand). In absence of a rule to this effect, perhaps it is just common sense? There must be something in the case book or some interpretation elsewhere where this is clear -- some knowledgeable basketball people say if the defender "caused" the ball to go out of bounds this precise play results in the dribbler's team retaining possession. More clarity if you can please.
 
HoopsFan1 said:
I understand making contact with the dribbler's hand is not a foul. I cannot find in the rule book where it explicitly says possession goes to the defender's team since no contact was made with the ball (only the hand). In absence of a rule to this effect, perhaps it is just common sense? There must be something in the case book or some interpretation elsewhere where this is clear -- some knowledgeable basketball people say if the defender "caused" the ball to go out of bounds this precise play results in the dribbler's team retaining possession. More clarity if you can please.
Click to expand...
You won't find anything in the rule or case book that addresses this because it does not exist.

IF a official rules that the defender touched the hand, and only the hand, then by rule the offensive player has caused the ball to go out of bounds.

I can tell you that after all the games I have worked and watched (both live and on television... which is in the thousands), I have never seen an official rule the offensive player is guilty of a violation. They always ruled that the defender contacted the ball as well.
 
AllSports12 said:
You won't find anything in the rule or case book that addresses this because it does not exist.

IF a official rules that the defender touched the hand, and only the hand, then by rule the offensive player has caused the ball to go out of bounds.

I can tell you that after all the games I have worked and watched (both live and on television... which is in the thousands), I have never seen an official rule the offensive player is guilty of a violation. They always ruled that the defender contacted the ball as well.
Click to expand...
OK, I think I have it and this is what I believed to be accurate. I was looking for confirmation. Bottom line, the correct call under the rule if the defender ONLY touched the hand and the ball goes out of bounds, it is a turnover against the dribbler (offense) and the ball goes to the defender's team. Thanks for engaging in this issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top