Never seen this before.

 

Nor have I. I'm not even sure they actually exist. The crew last night had no idea how to even call a basketball game, I can promise they didn't know what the term "case play" means.

 

As for a game being "under protest" I doubt you would ever get anywhere with it but it did make three officials run off the court as soon as it was said.

There is always a slight delay between the clock and the backboard light. Officials are told to look at the ball and listen to the buzzer. Much like in baseball where they are told to look at the feet touching the base and the sound of the ball hitting the glove.

 

Incorrect. When there is a light, it is first indicator. There is never a delay between clock and light as they are always wired on the same circuit. Light travels faster than sound. Without a light you go by the horn

Incorrect. When there is a light, it is first indicator. There is never a delay between clock and light as they are always wired on the same circuit. Light travels faster than sound. Without a light you go by the horn

 

Incorrect. When there is a light, it is first indicator. There is never a delay between clock and light as they are always wired on the same circuit. Light travels faster than sound. Without a light you go by the horn

I always thought it was the horn because how is the official supposed to have his central vision on the ball and his peripheral vision on the light/clock?

 

I always thought the red light behind the backboard was an added visual for show for the fans.

Except for the fact that the case book specifically covers this and says otherwise

 

 

9.2.10 SITUATION A: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hands. Team B has not been warned previously for a throw-in plane infraction. RULING: B1 is charged with a technical foul and it also results in the official having a team warning recorded and reported to the head coach. COMMENT: In situations with the clock running and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower’s efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic. (4-47-1; 10-1-5b, c; 10-3-10)”

 

Not true, this was not a boundary violation. It was a delay of game.

 

By rule, a Technical foul could have been called, but in this case it would have had no bearing on the final outcome

I always thought it was the horn because how is the official supposed to have his central vision on the ball and his peripheral vision on the light/clock?

 

I always thought the red light behind the backboard was an added visual for show for the fans.

 

Proper positioning for the final shot is the answer you are looking for here. Angles, angles, angles....

Not true, this was not a boundary violation. It was a delay of game.

 

Please reread rule 4-47 that explains a throw in plane violation is a delay of game

 

4-47 Warning for Delay

A warning to a team for delay is an administrative procedure by an official which is recorded in the score book by the scorer and reported to the head coach:

 

Art. 1...For throw-in plane violations, as in 9-2-10, 10-2-1c

Art. 2...For huddle by either team abdon contact with the free thrower, as in 10-2-1d.

Art. 3...For interfering with the ball following a goal as I 10-2-1e.

Art. 4...For failure to have the court ready for play following any time-out as in 10-2-1f.

 

 

So yes, that case play applies.

Not true, this was not a boundary violation. It was a delay of game.

 

Did you miss the part about interfering with the ball following a goal?

Did you miss the part about interfering with the ball following a goal?

 

Did you miss the part that said 5 seconds or less ? Clock was at 7 seconds....

 

Additionally, the "However,".... part of this rule supersedes the prior violation. If there are 5 seconds or less, you ignore, unless the delay causes the opposing team to be unable to in bound the ball, then it's a T irrespective of any warning or violation....

 

Don't parse your rules....

They intentionally grabbed the ball and refused to give it to BC.

 

The clock never stopped. The ref never blew the whistle.

 

No delay, game over.

 

When Williamstown was saying it should have been a delay BC was saying that's a technical for intentionally not giving the ball even after 4 seconds.

 

Bottom line is this, this win was not sexy at all for BC. It was the second game of a back to back, had an emotional night on Tuesday with Austin getting 3k points, and had to travel an hour and a half the next night to a out of region game.

 

The Polar Bears found a way to beat the team playing against them all night, all 8 of them.

The inverse is true: by not calling a delay, they penalize the strategy. As soon as the opposing player has secured the ball, not tapped through the net, and that player does not immediately pass it or tap it to an official, it is a delay. Irrespective of intention, that's a game management situation.

 

I was referring to this comment by you. It is either a technical foul or you let it go. And do not stop the clock as you know they are interfering with the thrower's ability to inbounder the ball for the sole purpose of stopping the clock. Secondly, we don't know what the clock said when the official noticed what the player was doing at the time he looked up it could have been at or under 5 seconds and why he purposefully did not call the delay

Did you miss the part that said 5 seconds or less ? Clock was at 7 seconds....

 

Additionally, the "However,".... part of this rule supersedes the prior violation. If there are 5 seconds or less, you ignore, unless the delay causes the opposing team to be unable to in bound the ball, then it's a T irrespective of any warning or violation....

 

Don't parse your rules....

 

I did not parse my rules. That would be you as a so called official not knowing all 4 delay of game situations

They intentionally grabbed the ball and refused to give it to BC.

 

The clock never stopped. The ref never blew the whistle.

 

No delay, game over.

 

When Williamstown was saying it should have been a delay BC was saying that's a technical for intentionally not giving the ball even after 4 seconds.

 

Bottom line is this, this win was not sexy at all for BC. It was the second game of a back to back, had an emotional night on Tuesday with Austin getting 3k points, and had to travel an hour and a half the next night to a out of region game.

 

The Polar Bears found a way to beat the team playing against them all night, all 8 of them.

 

You really think those 3 officials cared who won that game? I have never known one to care about making sure so and so won because I don't like what's their name.

You really think those 3 officials cared who won that game? I have never known one to care about making sure so and so won because I don't like what's their name.

 

Seems like most think there is a predetermined agenda by officials. I'm positive those guys didn't care who won.

Seems like most think there is a predetermined agenda by officials. I'm positive those guys didn't care who won.

Can you give your thoughts on post 6?