NCAA

Womens College Water Polo
oldtimer
Posts: 2325
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 4:57 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: All of the above

Re: NCAA

Postby oldtimer » Wed May 13, 2015 9:37 am

That is kind of an unbelievable interpretation of possession. It means that technically, in the scenario I brought up regarding a 6-on-5 shot *is* a penalty. And all those claiming that the call at the end of this game being correct because of this interpretation are saying that any time out called when a player is not actually touching the ball, under any situation, is a penalty. Again, unbelievable.

anmalanman
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon May 11, 2015 6:54 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: casual fan gaining interest

Re: NCAA

Postby anmalanman » Wed May 13, 2015 11:00 am

The rule clarification memo defining possession was sent out to all head coaches on September 5, 2014, by Brian Streeter, the secretary-rules editor of NCAA Men’s and Women’s Water Polo Rules Subcommittee.

And to be clear, the memo's clarification of what "possession" means applies to only the application of rules pertaining to timeouts (rule 12). How "possession" is defined for other rules may be different.

User avatar
fanofpolo
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby fanofpolo » Wed May 13, 2015 12:28 pm

Ok, I think I'm getting it. A team must physically be in possession of the ball when attempting to call a time out. The official in this case must have interpreted that the goalie either never controlled or possessed the ball or that the time out was called after she flipped the ball away and the ball was still in the air or floating on the water until a UCLA player actually took control of the ball. The September 5th memo to the coaches is pretty clear about possession of the ball in order to call a time out. Unfortunately we peons don't have access to that information.

sidelineview
Posts: 569
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 10:26 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby sidelineview » Wed May 13, 2015 12:29 pm

As what happens time to time, we find that our sport trips over itself due to minutia and contradictory rules and/or definitions & interpretations.

The concept of possession in this case...

But to better illustrate the conflict, let's say that the situation happened with 1:00 left in the quarter...

    - The shot clock would be reset on the Stanford shot and a new 35 interval starts with the UCLA GK in "possession" of the ball...say there are now 45 seconds left in the game.
    - The UCLA GK tosses the ball out to a "safe area" for a team mate to retrieve - as per rulebook instructions, the shot clock is not reset because possession has not been lost.
    - Yet the Penalty is called because the Timeout definition of possession has been crossed.
    - However, if the timeout was not called or if the Penalty had not been called, the 35 second shot/"possession" clock would not have been reset when the UCLA field player gets to the ball...because UCLA had not lost possession from the time the UCLA GK blocked the shot and passed the ball out.

It seems that the rulebook wants it both ways. It is "no possession" if a timeout is called, but it is continued possession if the field player is allowed to retrieve the ball.

BTW - I want to express my appreciation for the level of civility in this discussion. It is refreshing to see an online conversation where we are not pointing fingers at an individual, blame-shaming, etc. I think we all know that there is an issue with the rules as they are written --- and the unintended consequence has unfortunately surfaced at the most inopportune time.

wpobserver
Posts: 64
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2012 4:53 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: parent

Re: NCAA

Postby wpobserver » Wed May 13, 2015 12:53 pm

oldtimer wrote:
Doru Roll wrote:By this definition, since neither team could hold, advance, pass or shoot the ball when the horn sounded, it follows that neither team had possession. A lousy rule indeed, but a good call by the referees.


If, in fact, the goalie was in the act of passing the ball when the horn sounded then I suggest that using your definition she was in possession of the ball.

In order to illustrate my point, consider the following:

A player is 7 meters out on a 6-on-5, and shoots the ball. Right at that moment, the coach calls a time out. The ball hits the back of the cage. As a referee, do you:

1) Allow the goal
2) Disallow the goal and award a time out
3) Allow the goal and award a penalty shot to the opposing team
?


From NCAA Sept. 2014 Clarification Memorandum:

4. Rule 12-6 – Timeout Called When Neither Team Has Possession: Possession includes
physically controlling the ball, holding the ball, or the referee's whistle indicating one
team has been awarded the ball. Possession does not include when the ball is in the air
on a pass or shot, nor does it include being closest to or merely touching the ball
without physically controlling or holding the ball."anmalanman


Let's see, according to the rule, it is clear that in oldtimer's example, since the ball was "in the air on a shot", the goal would not count, the offensive team would lose a time out, and the opposing team gets a penalty shot. Wow, no wonder no one other than players and their parents gives a damn about water polo.

Russ Thompson
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:46 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby Russ Thompson » Wed May 13, 2015 1:10 pm

I have read all of this and watched the video many times and in particular I watched the clock closely. I agree with Dante. Once again the rules committee has done their very best to eliminate all possible combinations via yet another rule and rule clarification. Not that the NCAA rules committee really cares what I have to say about it, but if I were writing the rules, a team would be deemed to have possession of the ball until such time as the other team established possession. There would be no such thing as neither team having possession of the ball. One team or the other would possess the ball - 100% of the time with no gaps for the nebulous - no one has the ball bullshit. If I pass the ball to an open part of the pool thinking that my team mate can get to it - it is still my ball until such time as my team mate didn't get to it but the defender did. When the defender gets to the ball then a new possession is established.

If a team possesses the ball then, if we are to be offense minded and pay homage to 7.3 then we render a decision and write a rule where the team with the ball has possession until they don't have possession and the other team does have possession. If I possess the ball and I heave the ball 25 meters down the pool and 5 meters before it lands MY COACH calls timeout - s/he gets the timeout - period!

Ponder this question: If I dump the ball in to an area of the pool where I think my team mate can get to it and it takes 5 seconds for my team mate to get to it, should I have 5 seconds put back on my possession clock since no one possessed it during the so called 'no one has possession' time period? It is all so incredibly ridiculous yet those in power think they have it so right. This is one of the many reasons why this little, tiny fringe sport that no one really cares about will wallow while sports like Lacrosse flourish.

You cannot write a rule book to cover every situation - it isn't possible. There will always be unintended consequences for each rule. This one seems simple to me and it seems the more educated the rules makers are the less common sense is applied to the rule because of some convoluted scenario. Did we learn nothing from the Ill fated time out call in the Olympics? This scenario isn't the referees fault. They are doing what they were told to do - I guarantee you that - else they would not be on the deck in an NCAA final.

Russ Thompson
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:46 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby Russ Thompson » Wed May 13, 2015 1:14 pm

wpobserver wrote:[Let's see, according to the rule, it is clear that in oldtimer's example, since the ball was "in the air on a shot", the goal would not count, the offensive team would lose a time out, and the opposing team gets a penalty shot. Wow, no wonder no one other than players and their parents gives a damn about water polo.


Oh, but if the ball was in the air on a shot and the horn sounded the goal would count as long as no defender touched the ball,... except every other Wednesday, Friday afternoons and during the full moon or a coach wanted a time out.

User avatar
fanofpolo
Posts: 632
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 8:26 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby fanofpolo » Wed May 13, 2015 1:16 pm

Russ, your interpretation is exactly how it has been in the past. A team remains in possession until such time the opposing team takes possession.

User avatar
stickman
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Nov 27, 2006 8:54 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby stickman » Wed May 13, 2015 1:24 pm

Rule 12-6, as written in the NCAA Rule book may possibly be one of the most ill-conceived and poorly written rules in all of sports.
Based on the rule, as it's written, the shot clock should be reset every time the ball is passed from one teammate to another.
The official did NOT make the CORRECT call. A qualified official understands the spirit of the rules as well as the of the letter of the rule, and is capable of making the destinction in a split second based on years of experience. No matter how you consider it, this ref got it wrong.

Also, whoever was responsible for writing the interpretation needs to be replaced. That type of mistake would not fly in any other sport in the NCAA.
It's unfortunate and another example of why water polo struggles to gain a foothold of respectability in most college athletic departments.

Go WP
Posts: 80
Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2010 8:50 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: Coach, Fan

Re: NCAA

Postby Go WP » Wed May 13, 2015 1:57 pm

Russ wrote: "a team would be deemed to have possession of the ball until such time as the other team established possession."

Russ, the reason I don't think this works is that I could then call a timeout any time the ball is about to be stolen. This would: 1) Delay games, 2) unfairly penalize defense, 3) still leave arguments about when the other team "established possession".

We're always going to have judgment on this issue. I believe the current wording "possession of the ball (which means receiving control of the ball) during actual play" is sufficient.

These leaves us with two judgments, PASS and SHOT. A) If the ball is being to a teammate in a controlled fashion, that would constitute control, even if the ball were in the air at the time of the Time Out request. B) On a non-controlled pass or a shot attempt when T.O. is called with ball in air, the team does not have "contol" so I would assess the penalty (which I believe should be downgraded to loss of possession).

Russ Thompson
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:46 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby Russ Thompson » Wed May 13, 2015 2:09 pm

Go WP wrote:Russ wrote: "a team would be deemed to have possession of the ball until such time as the other team established possession."

Russ, the reason I don't think this works is that I could then call a timeout any time the ball is about to be stolen. This would: 1) Delay games, 2) unfairly penalize defense, 3) still leave arguments about when the other team "established possession".

We're always going to have judgment on this issue. I believe the current wording "possession of the ball (which means receiving control of the ball) during actual play" is sufficient.

These leaves us with two judgments, PASS and SHOT. A) If the ball is being to a teammate in a controlled fashion, that would constitute control, even if the ball were in the air at the time of the Time Out request. B) On a non-controlled pass or a shot attempt when T.O. is called with ball in air, the team does not have "contol" so I would assess the penalty (which I believe should be downgraded to loss of possession).



Your words "about to be stolen" means that it wasn't yet stolen ergo the offense possessed the ball. Each team gets 3 full and one 30 second TO to be used as they wish. So how is there a delay of a game? Personally I don't care if it unfairly penalizes the defense (I don't think it does though) because as it is now the offense is unfairly penalized. There will always be arguments, they simply will not be about who possesses the ball when a TO is called.

Doru Roll
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2011 6:56 pm
How are you connected to water polo?: player, fan, referee

Re: NCAA

Postby Doru Roll » Wed May 13, 2015 2:10 pm

Russ, there is one small problem: when the ball is shot and it rebounds into open water. The clock is reset on the shot, and then reset again when any player gains control of the ball (I know, it usually doesn't happen that way, but that's what the rule book says...). Since the ball is not in play and the clock is reset again, it follows that neither team had possession from the rebound until a player gains control. If so, I guess the referees should put their whistles in their pockets and wait for the ball to drop...

stickman, I agree with everything you say except for one thing: the officials did make the "right" call. Had the officials exercised good judgment (read: ignored a poorly written rule) in this case, they would probably never whistle an NCAA final again. And that would have been the "wrong" call...

Russ Thompson
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:46 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby Russ Thompson » Wed May 13, 2015 2:20 pm

stickman wrote:Rule 12-6, as written in the NCAA Rule book may possibly be one of the most ill-conceived and poorly written rules in all of sports.
Based on the rule, as it's written, the shot clock should be reset every time the ball is passed from one teammate to another.
The official did NOT make the CORRECT call. A qualified official understands the spirit of the rules as well as the of the letter of the rule, and is capable of making the destinction in a split second based on years of experience. No matter how you consider it, this ref got it wrong.

Also, whoever was responsible for writing the interpretation needs to be replaced. That type of mistake would not fly in any other sport in the NCAA.
It's unfortunate and another example of why water polo struggles to gain a foothold of respectability in most college athletic departments.


We don't whistle games via the 'spirit' of anything. Referring water polo is not a religion. If the rules and the interpreters of those rules tell you (the referee) how the call is to be made - then you do just that or you don't work as a referee. It is a pretty simple and an easy concept to follow for most. The coach blew it, actually, by calling a timeout and not trusting his team. The timeout, under current rules interpretation was a foolish time out call. That said, the interpretation is yet another failed attempt to remove the referee's brain from the equation and to allow a rule to decide - except it didn't work out that way - again...

Russ Thompson
Posts: 553
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2008 7:46 pm

Re: NCAA

Postby Russ Thompson » Wed May 13, 2015 2:23 pm

Doru Roll wrote:Russ, there is one small problem: when the ball is shot and it rebounds into open water. The clock is reset on the shot, and then reset again when any player gains control of the ball (I know, it usually doesn't happen that way, but that's what the rule book says...). Since the ball is not in play and the clock is reset again, it follows that neither team had possession from the rebound until a player gains control. If so, I guess the referees should put their whistles in their pockets and wait for the ball to drop...



Yes, because if I shoot and it bounces off the cage and back to my possession, what have I done to earn another possession besides MISS THE GOAL?!? But we would have to trust the judgment of the official and therein lies the problem.

keepingitpolo
Posts: 150
Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 12:27 am

Re: NCAA

Postby keepingitpolo » Wed May 13, 2015 8:44 pm

Not to sound simplistic but how about a ref won't grant a time out if a team does not have possession, nah that's to complicated

Return to “Womens Varsity Water Polo”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 5 guests