posession ruling?

[SLICE23]

Witnessing many games on the weekend from junior domestic to state championship to SEABL, the posession rule was bought in to get rid of jump ball sitiuations (no dramas) but from say the start of the rule where it was hardley called as the refs almost allowed the players to win posession, but now as so as 2 players touch the ball man the whistle get blown in 1 game on the weekend no bull 19 arrow posession change do you think its been over officiated now?

[FIREFAN]

Unfortunately No. Because they brought in the possession arrow to save the umpires from having to learn to consistently throw the ball straight up into the air. It'd be an amazing game if they had 19 jump balls. But at the same time it'd be fairer than say diving for a loose ball and saving it only to have given the ball up via a possession arrow when the umpire doesn't see who it went off so looks rather egg like in comparison. The possession arrow is unfair in that way cos it doesn't reward good D or anything.

[Skindog the Hawk]

I wouldn't say 19 jump ball situations is "over officiated" -> there have always been games where 19 jump balls would occur...Women's games and younger age groups are the notable situations.

As for the possession arrow being "unfair" - as a 5-11 guard who has won about 3 tip-offs in his lifetime, I think it's entirely fair that I now have a 50-50 chance of winning a contested possession. Also, the fact that the shot clock now does not reset when you retain possession makes it a bit fairer than last night.

SD.

[Coaches Couch]

Im on the fence i wouldnt say its over officated BUT the refs are calling it quickley without the players say winning the posession like you would like to see a 2 or 3 sec tussle not basically just placing your hands on it, then calling it.

[Ups]

As for the possession arrow being "unfair" - as a 5-11 guard who has won about 3 tip-offs in his lifetime, I think it's entirely fair that I now have a 50-50 chance of winning a contested possession. Also, the fact that the shot clock now does not reset when you retain possession makes it a bit fairer than last night.

SD.

Dog, I like you am vertically challenged (well I am anyways) at 5-9 but the jump ball was my favorite cause I would win over 50% of jump balls I contested in! But in my opinion I think that there is less hustle because of the new possession rule!

I think they will get ride of the jump ball in the first quarter all together eventually and go to a toss of a coin!

[revolution]

Because they brought in the possession arrow to save the umpires from having to learn to consistently throw the ball straight up into the air.
Although this was one reason it was brought in, it is not the only reason. Nor was it necessarily true of Australian elite or domestic referees. The reasons for the possession arrow rule's introduction included:
- Increasing the speed of the game - side balls take less time than jump balls.
- Removing the referee from being in the middle of the play. The referee often gets caught in the play as they move from the circle to their position.
- The difficulty in getting the ball up high, straight and quick when two 7+ footers are jumping.

Throughout history, the governing bodies have introduced rules that encourage an open and flowing game (ie. 3 second rule, 5 second rule, etc.). I don't think FIBA liked the idea of jump balls because it brings all the players into a confined space.

Therefore, I would say the alternate possession rule is the best alternative to the thing FIBA was actually trying to eliminate - the jump ball.

[Steph]

I know for fact that majority of players HATE the possession rule, especially in a tight close game that matters for finals, qualifying situation etc. You work so hard to get the ball so you can score and your reward is the other team having another chance to score in a an already tight situation.

However jump balls do suck quite a bit, for both players and refs (mostly players :wink: ) the argument that it favours the refs is sort of annoying, meaning i certainly hope they changed it for the players best interest.

I don't like the possession rule but revolution is right, what other alternative do we have? while FIBA is at it though, they should change the time for the shot clock, 24 secs is ridiculous. Make the game more strategising and not one to eventually run players into the ground, people like seeing skill over speed.

[revolution]

However jump balls do suck quite a bit, for both players and refs (mostly players :wink: ) the argument that it favours the refs is sort of annoying, meaning i certainly hope they changed it for the players best interest.
I didn't mean to imply the rule was introduced to make it better for the referees. It was intended to reduce the influence referees have on the game (ie. not getting in the way, throwing the ball inaccurately, etc).

FIBA rarely makes rule changes to improve the game for referees, nor should it. It almost always relates to the removal an unattractive aspect of the game (ie. flopping for charges) or opening/speeding up the flow of the game (ie. 24 sec clock).

[Steph]

sorry that comment came off really harsh. i spose with possession the refs can avoid being yelled at and making bad throw-ups so. You are right in the respect that it speeds the game up and takes out the un-attractiveness. The thing that bugs the players is the reward the other team gets for you good defence. But like you say, what can be invented that's better than possesion rule?

With the 24 second clock, i don't like it because you only get one chance to run through a play (without considerding reset and offensive rebound) and you have to make it a good one and you have to 'speed it up'. I would much rather see a good assist from good teamwork than a buzzer beater from netball third because you ran out of shot clock.

[Skindog the Hawk]

Steph,

Keep in mind now that if you retain possession, there is no reset of the shot clock - henceforth if you're on defence and you get a held ball with 12 seconds left on the shot clock and the opposition keeps the ball, they've got 12 seconds to get a shot off, not a new 24. That, and you get the next jump ball situation.

Personally (as stated before) I'm pretty happy with the situation as is. :lol: 8)

SD.

[Wallitron]

I actually didn't know about the "no reset". I'm not too sure referees know either, I managed to convince 2 refs in a game not long ago. They called for a reset after we retained possession without much arguement at all.

[revolution]

You must be pretty persuasive. :wink:

SD is certainly correct. The lack of knowledge on this change is due to its location in the rule book. It appears in the article relating to the 24 second operator (at the back of the book). So it was very easily overlooked.

Then again, I don't think many referees would know Rule 7 if it bit them on the @r5e.

Steph, im with you on the 24 seconds! give us 35!!!!!!

I always loved the idea of 24 seconds.. but now in ABA, coming up against zone defence, only having 24 to break it can prove very hard for some.. given 35 seconds, it would really gives teams a chance to run some great half court offence

[aussieBaller]

Steph, im with you on the 24 seconds! give us 35!!!!!!

I always loved the idea of 24 seconds.. but now in ABA, coming up against zone defence, only having 24 to break it can prove very hard for some.. given 35 seconds, it would really gives teams a chance to run some great half court offence

And a boring game.
A quick game is a good game.

[Ups]

Steph, im with you on the 24 seconds! give us 35!!!!!!

I always loved the idea of 24 seconds.. but now in ABA, coming up against zone defence, only having 24 to break it can prove very hard for some.. given 35 seconds, it would really gives teams a chance to run some great half court offence

And a boring game.
A quick game is a good game.

I agree a quick game is great to watch! :P

[Southern Joe]

.... From the point of view from watching on TV , also from the point of view from someone who has never played the game ( ie .. me ) , & also from the point of view of the person who's just started following basketball & is getting their heads around the rules as quick as possible ( ie ,... me , but in 1989 ) ... the possession arrow is detrimental for teh game . Sure it evens up small guys & bigs ... but unless you can see AND follow where the possession arrow is going .... forgettaboutit !!!!

Jump balls are easier to follow & understand .

[Trent]

You must be pretty persuasive. :wink:

SD is certainly correct. The lack of knowledge on this change is due to its location in the rule book. It appears in the article relating to the 24 second operator (at the back of the book). So it was very easily overlooked.

Then again, I don't think many referees would know Rule 7 if it bit them on the @r5e.


Had a situation in a recent Big V game where a double foul was called and the shot clock operator correctly did not reset the device, the ref overruled this and asked for a reset. When it was pointed out to him at half time, he replied 'when did that change?'

[revolution]

I suspect it has happened many times this season Trent.

[SLICE23]

[quote="revolution"][quote="Steph"] I didn't mean to imply the rule was introduced to make it better for the referees. It was intended to reduce the influence referees have on the game (ie. not getting in the way, throwing the ball inaccurately, etc).

my concern is that the refs are getting to involed now instead of letting players fight for a posession.

[revolution]

I haven't experienced this and there is no need for it have changed. The held ball rule has remained unchanged for a long, long time. The only change has been to what happens after a held ball.

I prefer not to involve the possession arrow in deciding who gets the ball. Therefore, I am now slightly less likely to call a held ball than I was last year.

[Homer]

I prefer not to involve the possession arrow in deciding who gets the ball. Therefore, I am now slightly less likely to call a held ball than I was last year.

Exactly Rev. I am a little slower to call a "held ball" now with the arrow than I was before.

[Steph]

If it's any help then players hardly every notice how long you take to call held ball. Usually they only notice if they have been fighting for a while or if you call it after the 2 players have only 'touched' the ball. They aren't really counting in their head how long it's been. But in a way i think they actually prefer to have it called earlier so that they dont have a chance to get the ball stolen from them.

I don't mind personally the only problems i have with refs calling the jump ball is when there is an obvious foul there but most of the time the game is too quick to determine how long they have been fighting. The other one is when it's the little guards trying to steal it from you but that's just a post player thing :wink: ...

[Homer]

I don't mind personally the only problems i have with refs calling the jump ball is when there is an obvious foul

Really obvious fouls should be called but quite often contact is made across arms or with the body that only a ref sees. When I was coming through the ranks I used to call those fouls ......... hey, that's my job, to call contact across arms etc but I was the only person in the entire gym that saw that contact. The Ref coaches have instructed us that we should call what everone sees, the held ball, instead of going under the microscope and calling a hands foul. If it's called consistantly there is no problem with this.

[Bobby]

Here is the rule on resetting the 24-second device on a double foul:

Team had control of the ball: No reset.

Successful field goal: Ball to other team, new 24-second period.

Ball had touched the ring when the double foul is called, and the Lucky Dog keeps the team with previous control of the ball with the ball: New 24-second period.

Ball did not touch ring when double foul called, and Lucky Dog keeps team with previous control of ball: No reset.

Any Lucky Dog causing a turnover: New 24-second period.

In the NBA, with no Lucky Dog, the 24-second clock is ALWAYS reset on jump balls. If there is one second remaining when a tie-up happens, the clock is always reset to 24 for the ensuing tap. (From 2001-2004, if it was a defense-caused tie-up, it was just 14 seconds.)

In leagues with the Lucky Dog, there can be a situation where a tie-up with one second left on the 24-second device results in a Lucky Dog favouring the offense, and a sure-fire 24-second siren.

[SLICE23]

just to but a another bit of splice into life, many disscusions on the weekend with various bball people and from the discussuions this will be looked @ the end of the year the possesion call the fouls are being missed as players reach over the top , infringe in someways to get to the ball ARE NOT being called as fouls instead jump ball ie possesion rule...Is anyone experience this?

[Skindog the Hawk]

just to but a another bit of splice into life, many disscusions on the weekend with various bball people and from the discussuions this will be looked @ the end of the year the possesion call the fouls are being missed as players reach over the top , infringe in someways to get to the ball ARE NOT being called as fouls instead jump ball ie possesion rule...Is anyone experience this?

No more than usual :lol: ;) 8)

Sd.

[Homer]

In my experience this season in Victoria Slice, I am not being instructed by referee coaches that I am missing fouls but calling held balls and to the best of my knowledge, my fellow refs down here are in the same boat. You might find that the lesser experienced refs are using the held ball as a cop out instead of calling a foul, hedging their bets you might say.

[revolution]

just to but a another bit of splice into life, many disscusions on the weekend with various bball people and from the discussuions this will be looked @ the end of the year the possesion call the fouls are being missed as players reach over the top , infringe in someways to get to the ball ARE NOT being called as fouls instead jump ball ie possesion rule...Is anyone experience this?
Poll results (thus far)
No - 3
Yes - 0

:D :wink:

[SLICE23]

Rev...slice vote 1 , Homer wasnt exactly saying no @ least .5 :lol:

[Coaches Couch]

Slice im with you, not all the time but often enough the foul does not get the call & like Homer said inexperience are either not being advised properly or bail themselfs out !

[Homer]

Rev...slice vote 1 , Homer wasnt exactly saying no @ least .5 :lol:

OK then .......... NO.

Are you from NSW Slice? I'm getting the feeling that a number of people on these boards are having trouble with refs and they seem to be originating in NSW. I think the depth of good quality refs in NSW falls away quite quickly after the top 10 or so. Anyway thats the impression I get from these boards. I may be wrong.

[SLICE23]

Victoria

[Blind Teddy]

Slice, :o
I'm with you here. I think the problem is in the interpretation of what is a jump ball call. Sometimes they let you tug the ball free (especially when double teaming is happening) other times (especially in rebounding situations) the whistle blows almost instantaneously. Can we get a clarification of the rule? Is there a grey area in it?
:idea:
Oh and if we wanted to speed the game up why was the introduction of the referee having to touch the ball on all whistles brought in when in the past you were able to inbound in the back half without the referee handling it on violations. On one hand your saying speed the game up when people introduce rules to slow it down. Do you ref's have any thoughts on that on????

[revolution]

Art 12.1.2 - A held ball occurs when one or more players of each opposing team have one or both hands firmly on the ball so that neither player can gain control without undue roughness.

It all comes down to the interpretation and judgement of undue roughness. I would suggest the younger the age group, the quicker the jumpball should be called. The exception occurs when the referee believes clear control can be established without risking a player's safety (ie. a double team situation). A referee should not take "the hussle" out of the game but they have an equal responsibility to prevent the game from getting too rough. A tough balance to strike sometimes.

As for the referee "handling the ball on all whistles" rule change - this was implemented around 1992. Although the previous rule did allow for a quick transition/inbounding of the ball in the backcourt, it also created many conflicts between teams. For example, let's say a player committed a travel violation in the front court. You would often find the player would hold onto the ball long enough to allow their teammates to recover back into defensive position. You would also find that the opposition became quite aggressive in an attempt to take the ball back.

A similar situation happens regularly in the football codes where the man on the mark or the marker hold up their opponent to slow down the play. It is a regular source of frustration for the offensive team.

Therefore, FIBA conceded a slowing down of the game in order to eliminate the potential conflicts the rule created.

[SLICE23]

By reading this it doesnt come down to which state it is it just seems to be a issue all around, it comes down to interpretation simple as that.

[revolution]

But this article hasn't changed at all. I find it difficult to accept that changing from jump ball to possession arrow would change how referees judge "undue roughness".

[SLICE23]

For you Rev it may not be happening to you, but it is for some it is whether you can believe it or not maybe some inexperience refs are bailing out of a tuff call :oops:
Maybe this will be looked at at the end of the year,which i have mentioned before that certain people in the know have express interest in this area as they feel this is a reoccurence.

[Coaches Couch]

People have to both except that a, some refs dont call it & b, and coaches now have to adjust to the style the game has gone to which is wrong the rule was bought into for reducing the referees but has done the opposite they are more into it and having a influence.

[revolution]

For you Rev it may not be happening to you, but it is for some it is whether you can believe it or not maybe some inexperience refs are bailing out of a tuff call :oops:
Maybe this will be looked at at the end of the year,which i have mentioned before that certain people in the know have express interest in this area as they feel this is a reoccurence.
It is completely reasonable to expect more jump ball situations in junior basketball. I would be surprised if FIBA, BA or BV consider changing the possession arrow rule because "some inexperience refs are bailing out of a tuff call". If incorrect calls are being made, the referee needs coaching more than the rule needs changing.

People have to both except that a, some refs dont call it & b, and coaches now have to adjust to the style the game has gone to which is wrong the rule was bought into for reducing the referees but has done the opposite they are more into it and having a influence.
:shock: huh?!?

[Coaches Couch]

Rev....which bit dont you get?

[revolution]

The bit before "a" and after "b". It took a few read-throughs. :wink: