View Single Post
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 08, 2020, 10:53am
Freddy Freddy is offline
This IS My Social Life
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: at L, T, or C
Posts: 2,379
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
... but will this provide any guidance?

2011-12 NFHS Basketball Rules Interpretations
SITUATION 8: Team A has a designated spot throw-in along the end line. Thrower A1 extends the ball with his/her arms over the end line such that part of the forearms, hands and the ball are entirely on the inbounds side of the boundary line. B2 slaps A1 on the wrist and dislodges the ball. RULING: When a defender makes contact with a thrower-in, the result is an intentional foul. Where A1’s arms are located (on the inbounds or out-of-bounds side of the boundary line) is immaterial for this penalty to be assessed. A1 is awarded two free throws and Team A awarded a throw-in at the spot nearest the foul. COMMENT: For a boundary-plane violation warning to also be assessed, the defender must actually violate the rule and penetrate the boundary plane. (4-19-3e; 4-47-1; 7-5-4b; 9-2-10 Penalty 4)
Ooooooo. Yes, I ran across that in the Interps. In fact, that also made it into the Casebook, 9.2.10C. However, I didn't associate it at the time with the play under discussion. If the NFHS is stating a universal principle there, this certainly would apply and would suggest that a 4-47-3 DOG warning NOT be issued for this situation.
Thanx.
__________________
Making Every Effort to Be in the Right Place at the Right Time, Looking at the Right Thing to Make the Right Call
Reply With Quote