Play of the Week

posted Dec 4, 2017, 5:24 AM by Terry Irish
https://iaabo.org/1718Play6/index.html

The following summary comes directly from the National IAABO interpreters:

It appears the officials missed a rotation at the far end of the court, leading to the situation in which two of them were moving to the lead position while in transition.  In an effort to correct their positioning, the official opposite the table attempts to get the attention of the official moving to the tableside lead position.  As a result, the opposite-side Lead momentarily takes his eyes off the players.  It is unclear whether this has an impact on the official's ability to rule on this play, but is certainly not ideal.  

TRI-> Can you imagine if both lead officials had double whistles? This was certainly a cluster from a PCA point of view. Obviously this team was not well versed in  3-person officiating.

The ball handler executes an illegal spin move that could have been ruled a traveling violation.  His left foot is the pivot foot when he picks up the ball.  His left foot then returns to the floor while he is still in possession of the ball, resulting in a traveling violation.  It appears the foul occurs just before the player's left foot returns to the floor.  If White #10 made illegal contact prior to the ball handler's left foot (pivot foot) returning to the floor, there would be no traveling violation.  If the contact by White #10 is not illegal and/or occurs after the ball handler's pivot foot returns to the floor, the correct ruling would be a traveling violation. This is a great play to discuss official's positioning, judgment, and the importance of quickly identifying the pivot foot in a spin move situation.

TRI-> When I first looked at it in real time, I thought there was a traveling violation and therefore no foul.

IAABO's ruling on this play is that the foul occurred just prior to the traveling violation.  Because the ball handler had begun his habitual motion toward the basket, by rule his try for goal had begun and the official's ruling of two free throws was correct. 

When the ruling official called a foul, it was not immediately clear what type of foul he ruled and how play would be resumed.  This reinforces the importance of providing preliminary information at the site of the foul or violation.  In order to effectively communicate  rulings to partners and other game participants, it is important that officials properly execute the appropriate signal sequence, as outlined on pages 127 and 139 - 140 of this year's IAABO Manual.  

TRI-> I think this is covered on most Plays of the Week. It is so important that your partners know what you have so that they can react and get the ball back in play or the players lined up for a free throw. Lack of communication leads to confusion and poor game management. If the coaches think that you don't know what you are doing, it's going to be a long night!

An interesting play situation to consider that is brought to mind by this play ... Would anything have changed if the player's try for goal was successful?  Answer = No!  If a player is fouled in the act of shooting and subsequently violates, the violation ends the act of shooting and no points can be scored.  The correct procedure would be to disallow the score and award the player who is fouled in the act of shooting two free throws. 
 

Comments