📈 Elevate Your Officiating IQ: Breakdown of 5 Key Basketball Plays 🏆

Рет қаралды 5,609

Күн бұрын

Пікірлер: 38

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

❇ // Pinned Comment: If you have a question about a play, adding a timestamp (MM:SS format) makes a huge difference in our ability to respond. SUPPORT THE SHOW: abetterofficial.com/coffee?yt FREE TRAINING FOR NEW OFFICIALS: abetterofficial.com/newofficials Hug a Ref! Tee is available here: a-better-official.creator-spring.com/listing/hug-a-ref

@michaelj529 10 ай бұрын

Very helpful clips. Especially play # 1 and the bonus play. Well done

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

Glad it was helpful!

@KevinSmith-vz7xh 10 ай бұрын

When I get home tonight I am sending you two plays from a game earlier in the Christmas season. Will explain in the email!

@ignaciocompilation5069 10 ай бұрын

Great job examples! 🏀

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

Appreciate it!

@brandonsoulek4426 10 ай бұрын

Question about a variation of Play 1, rule 9-3-3: A1 runs out of bound along the end line around the screens set by A2 and A3. A1 runs back onto the court, fully established in bounds. After A1 is back on the court, A4 continues dribbling the basketball for 4 seconds as the play continues. A4 makes the first pass over to A1. Do we have a violation? Basically, what the question is, if a teammate (A4) is dribbling or holding the basketball when the player (A1) is fully returned onto the court, does that teammate's holding or dribbling of the ball count as the first touching, then making it legal to pass to A1?

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

The purpose of the rule is to rule this a violation. Next to touch is probably better language for the rule

@briholt100 10 ай бұрын

I appreciate this question. It's getting to an issue of "has player gained an advantage by voluntarily going out of bounds" if several other events have transpired before being "first to touch". Seems like if they got an advantage, then it should be a violation. If they created danger, it should be a violation. But if they didn't get an advantage, then...and maybe this is my ignorance... why should we care?

@zacharynyhusmoen 10 ай бұрын

PLAY2: I'm guessing I'm going to have a different pov on this than others, but 1.4 seconds left, 2 pt game, time ran off because we might have been a little slow; there's going to have to be extraordinary circumstances for me to call a T. The player's going to have to be screaming and wildly gesturing (not just the little one in the video). Unless he said something extremely foul or continued to vehemently argue after we've moved on, I'm at the most going to have a brief conversation with him. I just feel like this is inserting ourselves into the game. And the game is above the crew and most definitely above yourself. Play3: Great catch by Trail on that, T that up every time Play4: Right call, just don't like calling that from all the way down the court. Have a discussion first, especially if we're tossing a kid. Erodes trust from coaches and partners if you're grabbing stuff from 50' away. Love the videos Greg!

@MaydayAggro 10 ай бұрын

Totally agree with both 2 and 3. In 3 trail got that call immediately. Great awareness.

@ClaytonRaines 10 ай бұрын

Can you reference the backcourt violation? I’m not seeing anything in the rule or case book relative to this specific play. Thanks!

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

9-9 ART. 1 . . . A player shall not be the first to touch the ball after it has been in team control in the frontcourt, if he/she or a teammate last touched or was touched by the ball in the frontcourt before it went to the backcourt.

@ClaytonRaines 10 ай бұрын

@@BetterOfficials Perfect, I read that a few times but it just wasn’t registering. I appreciate the help!

@MackLee23 10 ай бұрын

I'm a new official and am still confused on scenario #1. The NFHS website states the following: "9-3-3: Establishes that a player may step out of bounds without penalty unless they are the first player to touch the ball after returning to the court or if they left the court to avoid a violation. Rationale: Allows a player to step out of bounds if they gain no advantage and penalizes a team only if they gain an advantage by leaving the court and returning to avoid a violation or to be the first to touch the ball." "...unless they are the first player to touch the ball after returning to the court" and "...or to be the first to touch the ball." indicate to me that no matter the reason, being the first to touch the ball after stepping out of bounds would be a violation. The first part of the rationale section references leaving the court not being penalized as long as no advantage is gained, but nothing about touching the ball. I don't understand where your reasoning is coming from based strictly on how this is worded. Again, I'm new and am definitely not saying you're wrong. I'm just trying to learn and some of this wording gets tricky for my brain. Thanks so much!

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

Hi This is excellent! That is language from NFHS in their preseason 'reveal' of rules changes. But, let's look at the rule itself ART. 3 . . . A player shall not step out of bounds under the player’s own volition and then become the first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court or to avoid a violation. UNDER THE PLAYER'S OWN VOLITION is the qualifier here. When a player chooses to run out of bounds to get to another part of the court, they have left the court of their own volition. This is a an uncommon circumstance. In the past, simply taking this action was itself a violation. This rules change was meant to correct that situation. Does that make sense?

@fromtheoutside 10 ай бұрын

Play 1 & 6: In FIBA we do not have a specific provision covering intentionally leaving the court unless it is to avoid a 3-second violation. Our only recourse would be to call a technical foul which would fall under fair play. Play 2: Even if you are not used to shot clocks, when you hear a horn and no one has clear possession, then it's not a bad idea to stop play and find out what's going on. With the T, it may have been warranted, but what is it with officials calling them when the player is walking away; I think he should have T'd the player when he was gesticulating, or done a better job of telling the player to relax and just say "we got it." Though, who am I to talk, I haven't given out a T since 1999 to anyone...patience, I have a lot 😄 Play 3: Looks like I would have to break my streak of no T's for that one, though it would have been a good one to do it on. Play 4: A good get by the trail, but should have wandered down to the 3-point line, so all the players and his partner had a better idea of what was going on, and he would have been closer when the player stepped over the other player. Also, if the trail is closer, then we don't have to see the player walk down the court with his arms raised in some triumphant display. Play 5: Just simply a missed backcourt violation.

@deankirkpatrick7658 10 ай бұрын

play one, the ref is pointing at the line, as if he had the player out of bounds when he touched the ball. But - good points on going out of play

@scottramage660 10 ай бұрын

Greg, For play #1 please take a look at 9-3 art 3 and Comments on the 2023-24 rules changes (page 77 under 9-3-3) in the NFHS rule book. I think the player violates by rule with the change in place. First to touch after leaving the court. I believe the comment from Beastmode-jd1em could be what the ref called, but the returning to the court and first to touch is a violation.

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

Scott, you bring up the Crux of the matter. Look at your language "cannot be the first to touch after returning to the court" that is a misapplication of the rule. If, a player leaves the court *of their own volition* and then (and only then) upon returning to the court is the first to touch then it is a violation I think many officials have in their mind the exact phrase that you use. Cannot be the first touch upon returning. That is why so many of these calls are ruled incorrectly.

@nickpavlecic2815 10 ай бұрын

I think the hardest part of that play in particular was deciding in real time if that was or was not "own volition" . I can see that play being called more wrong than right@@BetterOfficials

@jasongriffin382 10 ай бұрын

So if a player saves a ball from going out of bounds (does this by his own volition) this rule would read he can’t be the first to touch the ball? However if the ball is saved into another person and bounces free of any player control, they could then retrieve the ball of they have established themselves in bounds?

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

No. You are incorrect as are many. A player who saves the ball from going out of bounds and then they themselves go out of bounds is not liable in any way shape or form to return to the floor Court. That is not what this rules modification was instituted for. A player who leaves the floor due to momentum has no liability Upon returning to the court and being the first to touch the basketball. A player who chooses to run in the out of bounds area to get from one place to the other does bear that liability.

@isaiahhaynie1510 10 ай бұрын

Great explanation of legal and illegal touching.

@Garb316 10 ай бұрын

7:14 would that be a double technical (and disqualification) on 24? One on the hanging on the rim, one on the taunt?

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

I suppose you could make a case for that.

@ericerickson7544 10 ай бұрын

Gregg after seeing play two the player hanging on the rim for his protection and then removing one hand patting the opponent on the head is unsporting and I would possibly give him a 2nd T for hanging on the rim since he disregarded his safety to remove one hand a receive the first UNS T. I can live with the one T but since his entire team was just as disrespectful might warrant the second. What was not show is how the bench personnel reacted and if they were on the floor to give an indirect to the HC for non players. This whole play needs to be looked and reviewed by NFHS

@beastmode-jd1em 10 ай бұрын

In play 1, I don't think he's calling him out for leaving the court and coming back in as first to touch. I think when he recieve's the ball he is still out of bounds. I can't definitively state that as the player is out of picture as to his foot location but based on his position It seems like his foot would still be out when he touches the ball. JMO.

@JohnCarterRocks 10 ай бұрын

Only call technical fouls if it will make the game better going forward. This frustration did not occur on this 1 play. Something tells me if I watch the rest of the game there are going to be many incorrect or missed calls by the referee that called the technical foul. His partner called the shot clock violation and the game should have moved on.

@ThomDartt 10 ай бұрын

What does Rule 10.4.6 say? Also, in Rule 10, I don't see anything in there about technicals to make the game better. The picking and choosing of which rules to follow leads to confusion for the players, coaches, fans and media and it's why so many games are officiated so inconsistently. If every official called games by the rules and mechanics, our officiating would take giant steps in improvement And that would make the game better. But instead, we have officials who make up their own undefined philosophies that are unknown to their partners, the players and coaches. That never makes the game better.

@JohnCarterRocks 10 ай бұрын

@@ThomDartt ... Judgment goes into every unsportsmanlike technical call. Younger referees blame players for the mistakes they made during a game. Veteran referees understand that they're not perfect and may have missed a call leading to legit player frustration. This philosophy isn't made up by one individual. It's shared by all veteran referees as they move up in level. You don't blow up games based on poor judgment as this referee did. That makes the game better for everyone.

@LostLakeTribune 10 ай бұрын

Regarding #1, if this is not a violation, get rid of rule 9-3-3 then!

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

You are misinterpreting the rule methinks.

@jerimyclonch7858 10 ай бұрын

disqualifying player play,,, how many shots? were any fouls called on the layup... if it was a layup and foul called... We shooting 4 free throws?

@BetterOfficials 10 ай бұрын

The foul ruling in that situation would be a flagrant foul. That would mean to free throws to the offended player or their eligible substitute if they are not able to continue plus the ball at the spot of the foul. Due to the subsequent technical fouls that throw in never occurs.