MIES (Switzerland) - Experts analyze all BCL games each week. In order to improve the understanding of referees' decisions and to increase transparency, we publish some of those Tough Calls, along with an explanation.

TC1: Unicaja vs. Pallacanestro Reggiana - Technical foul

During the first quarter, after a valid field goal by White #0, Green #45 is about to get the ball to take the throw-in from behind his endline, when White #0 touches the ball, thus delaying the game.

The referee gives a warning for this to the White team. Two minutes later, White #5 scores a valid field goal. White #11 takes the ball and throws it away, again delaying the game. The referee calls a Technical Foul to White #11.

Article 36.2.1: A technical foul is a player non-contact foul of a behavioral nature including, but not limited to:

• Delaying the game by deliberately touching the ball after it passes through the basket or by preventing a throw-in or a free throw from being taken promptly or coming on the court late to start the game or the second half.

OBRI 36-1 Statement: A warning is given to a player for an action or behaviour which, if repeated, may lead to a technical foul.

That warning shall also be communicated to the head coach of that team and shall apply to any member of that team for any similar actions for the remainder of the game.

A warning shall be given only when the ball becomes dead, and the game clock is stopped.

Outcome: Correct decision by the referees both for the warning and for the technical foul, as the same action was repeated by the same team after a warning had been given.

The Green team shall attempt one free throw with no line-up and the game shall be resumed with a Green team throw-in from behind his endline, as after any valid field goal.

TC2: AEK Betsson BC vs. Nanterre 92 - Shooter landing

Yellow #3 attempts a three-point field goal, with Black #6 trying to block the shot, which is unsuccessful. The referee calls a foul on the act of shooting to Black #6.

Article 33.6: A player who has jumped into the air from a place on the court has the right to land on another place on the court provided that the landing place and the direct path between the take-off and landing place is not already occupied by an opponent at the time of take-off.

Outcome: Correct decision by the referee. Black #6 occupied a place that was free when Yellow #3 took off for the shot, so Black #6 is responsible for the contact. Yellow #3 shall attempt three free throws.

TC3: La Laguna Tenerife vs. Bertram Derthona Basket - Unsportsmanlike foul

Black #9 starts a transition when White #34 creates an illegal contact on the dribbler.

The referee calls a personal foul to White #34. The referee becomes uncertain whether White #34 foul could be an unsportsmanlike foul and decide to use IRS. After the review, the initial decision for personal foul is confirmed.

Article 37.1.1: An unsportsmanlike foul is a player contact which is:

• Contact with an opponent not legitimately attempting to directly play the ball within the spirit and intent of the rules.

• Excessive, hard contact caused by a player in an effort to play the ball or an opponent.

• An unnecessary contact caused by the defensive player in order to stop the progress of the offensive team in transition. This applies until the offensive player starts the act of shooting.

• An illegal contact caused by a player from behind or laterally on an opponent, who is progressing towards the opponent’s basket and with no opponents between the progressing player and the basket, and: - the progressing player is in control of the ball, or - the progressing player is attempting to gain control of the ball, or - the ball has been released on a pass to the progressing player.

This applies until the offensive player starts the act of shooting.

Outcome: Correct decision by the referee. White #34 tried to reach for the ball and the illegal contact did not meet any of the 4 criteria to be considered an unsportsmanlike foul.

The game shall be resumed with a Black team throw-in on its backcourt and 24 seconds on the shot clock.

TC4: La Laguna Tenerife vs. Bertram Derthona Basket - Goaltending

In the first quarter, Black #3 makes a layup and the shot is blocked by White #1. The referee calls a goaltending violation.

The White team Head Coach requests a Head Coach Challenge. After the review, the referees decide there was no goaltending violation and decide to resume the game as per the alternating possession arrow, which favored the White team.

Article 31.2.1: Goaltending occurs during a shot for a goal when a player touches the ball while it is completely above the level of the ring and:

• It is on its downward flight to the basket, or

• After it has touched the backboard.

F-3.2: The following game situations may be reviewed when the game clock shows 2:00 minutes or less in the fourth quarter and in each overtime:

• whether a goaltending or basket interference violation was called correctly.

When the review determines that a goaltending or basket interference violation was not called correctly the game shall be resumed as follows, if after the call:

• The ball has legally entered the basket; the goal shall count and the defensive team shall be entitled to a throw-in from the endline.

• A player of either team has gained an immediate and clear control of the ball, that team shall be entitled to a throw-in from the place nearest to where the ball was located when the call was made.

• Neither team has gained an immediate and clear control of the ball, a jump ball situation occurs.

F.4.2: For the HCC, the following procedure shall apply:

• The time restrictions within Appendix F.3.2 and 3.3 do not apply. The HCC may be requested at any time in the game.

OBRI F-3.2.7: Immediate and clear control of the ball occurs when, after the call is made, a player directly gains possession of the ball on the court.

The immediate and clear control of the ball must be the first action after the whistle. Any illegal contact to gain possession of the ball or the ball touching or being touched by multiple players is not an immediate and clear control of the ball.

When the ball goes out-of-bounds without a player of either team having gained possession of the ball, the opponent of the team that causes the ball to go out-of-bounds is considered as having gained an immediate and clear control of the ball.

Outcome: Regarding the decision; initial incorrect decision by the referee, which was corrected after the IRS review. The ball was touched by White #1 before it had touched the backboard.

This is a legal play as the following contact by White #1 with the backboard, once the shot had been blocked, did not have any effect on the movement of the ball.

Regarding how to resume the game, incorrect action by the referees, as the White team established an immediate and clear control of the ball after the call.

The game should have been resumed with a White team throw-in, but not following the alternating possession protocol. The arrow should still favour the White team after the throw-in.

The game clock should display 4:56 and the shot clock 24 seconds.