IAABO Sportorials Magazine ...

bob jenkins

Zoochy wrote
Logic tells us that a Throw-in at the division line IS NOT in the Front Court nor the Back Court. Thus if there is a violation during the Throw-in, then which 28' mark would you move it to? The answer is neither. It stays at the division line.
The only time you have a division line Throw-in is the beginning of the 2nd, 3rd, 4th quarters and after a Technical foul.

1) Disagree The division line is in the BC of both teams

2) What if the ball goes OOB right at the division line?[/COLOR]

Further, If you aren't going to move a throw-in that was originally at the division line, why are you moving any throw-in when there's a throw-in violation? (which, I think, was Raymond's point)

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
What if the ball goes OOB right at the division line?

What if the ball goes out of bounds at the division line table side?

Maybe IAABO, and possibly the NFHS, just want this enforced to start periods and after technical fouls?

If so, why don't they just come out and say it?

Zoochy

bob jenkins wrote
1) Disagree The division line is in the BC of both teams

2) What if the ball goes OOB right at the division line?[/COLOR]

Further, If you aren't going to move a throw-in that was originally at the division line, why are you moving any throw-in when there's a throw-in violation? (which, I think, was Raymond's point)

So, Team A has a 'Division line throw-in after a Technical foul or to begin the 2nd, 3rd or 4th quarter. Team A commits a Throw-in violation. Am I understanding you want to move the Throw-in to Team B's 28' mark in their Back Court?

bob jenkins

Zoochy wrote
So, Team A has a 'Division line throw-in after a Technical foul or to begin the 2nd, 3rd or 4th quarter. Team A commits a Throw-in violation. Am I understanding you want to move the Throw-in to Team B's 28' mark in their Back Court?

It would be consistent with the other throw-in rules (as I understand them; recognizing that the details aren't all out yet). That said, I will administer the rule the way the NFHS tellsus to when the details do come out.

Play:
A1 from her frontcourt, passes the ball to A2. A2 loses track of her position on the court and is standing with one foot on the intersection of the division line and the sideline.

A) This is an OOB violation and B inbounds adjacent to the division line.

B) This is a BC violation and B inbounds from the neares 28' mark in their FC.

C) Coach B gets to choose whether to inbound from A or B.

D) B gets to "run the sideline" between A and B

E) Who cares, because most officials won't even think of any location issues?

F) Other

Raymond

bob jenkins wrote
1) Disagree The division line is in the BC of both teams

2) What if the ball goes OOB right at the division line?[/COLOR]

Further, If you aren't going to move a throw-in that was originally at the division line, why are you moving any throw-in when there's a throw-in violation? (which, I think, was Raymond's point)

It was. I knew it would go over Billy's head...LOL

As far as the division line, yes, it is part of each team's back court.

However, throw ins are neither front court or back court. They are adjacent to the front court or back court. A throw in from the division line is adjacent to neither or to both. I'm assuming that's the logic they are using.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
A1 from her frontcourt, passes the ball to A2. A2 loses track of her position on the court and is standing with one foot on the intersection of the division line and the sideline.

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
A1 from her frontcourt, passes the ball to A2. A2 loses track of her position on the court and is standing with one foot on the intersection of the division line and the sideline.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7MziVYtAgY

Raymond

Heads up, but that's not a video of a play above this post. So if you can't see it don't worry about it.

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

JRutledge

BillyMac wrote
What if the ball goes out of bounds at the division line table side?

Maybe IAABO, and possibly the NFHS, just want this enforced to start periods and after technical fouls?

If so, why don't they just come out and say it?

Billy, I met your interpreters. I have known one of them for a year now. If you do not talk to them about this, that is kind of on you. She seems rather educated on all the subjects. She is my spirit interpreter; love her. So if you are struggling with this, you are not asking the right questions, my friend. 😉

Peace

Zoochy

Here is a video explaining the 2026-2027 new rules
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2jZPkvbwJE

JRutledge

Zoochy wrote
Here is a video explaining the 2026-2027 new rules
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V2jZPkvbwJE

Yes, this is our meeting. 😀

Peace

BillyMac

JRutledge wrote
Yes, this is our meeting.

Bd. 267 (IL) Interpreter Jeff Rutledge then made his
(IAABO) Fall Seminar debut and delivered an outstanding
overview of Basket Interference and Goaltending,
tackling an area that continues to require strong
rules knowledge and judgment from officials.

bwburke94

Still confused on dead ball technical fouls; it appears that change is being treated as it was meant to be written, not as it was actually written.

JRutledge

bwburke94 wrote
Still confused on dead ball technical fouls; it appears that change is being treated as it was meant to be written, not as it was actually written.

To put it bluntly, if the dead ball fouls are equal (between teams, like 2-2 or 1-1), we do not shoot free throws. If they are unequal (2-1 or 3-1), we will shoot something and give the ball to the team without as many technicals.

We no longer have to split hairs on what is a double foul or what "approximately the same time" means. There could be different players, different incidents, and different officials who call the fouls; if they match, we will just go to the point of interruption as we did on any called double foul.

Peace

BillyMac

BillyMac wrote
When a throw-in violation occurs during a division-line throw-in opposite the table, the resulting throw-in remains at the division line opposite the table. This is one of the rare instances in which a violation does not result in the ensuing throw-in being administered at one of the eight designated spots.

B1 steps out of bounds at the intersection of the tableside sideline and the division line. Inbounder A1, during the ensuing throwin from out of bounds at the tableside division line, creates a throwin violation by stepping onto the court before the throwin ends. Where does Team B get the ball for their subsequent throwin?

Raymond

Hasn't this question been asked or addressed sometime during this offseason on this forum?

What was the answer then?

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

bob jenkins

Raymond wrote
Hasn't this question been asked or addressed sometime during this offseason on this forum?

What was the answer then?

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

On the contrary -- both parts were asked, but no answer has been seen (AFAIK) from IAABO / NFHS. Not sure why they needed to be posted again.

BillyMac

Raymond wrote
Hasn't this question been asked or addressed sometime during this offseason on this forum? What was the answer then?

bob jenkins wrote
On the contrary both parts were asked, but no answer has been seen from IAABO / NFHS. Not sure why they needed to be posted again.

I could not find an answer on previous Forum threads.

We had our local new rules meeting last week, and this was glossed over in a confusing manner, sometimes stating "division line" and other times stating "division line opposite the table".

Most often in regard to starting a period or after a technical foul but occasionally broached as subsequent to an out of bounds play.

I would love to get some clarification from the Forum, and possibly an answer rather than questions from Raymond and bob jenkins.

If I knew the answer, I would not have asked.

Read this literally and it appears that a throwin violation subsequent to an out of bounds violation on the table sideline at the division line gets moved across the court to opposite tableside (of course this must be false).

I wish that IAABO had simply left out the last three words "opposite the table" and all situations would be perfectly clear.

Unfortunately, I only have access this year to the IAABO Manual.

I decided not to purchase the NFHS Rule Book and Case Book this year.

Anybody got a sneaky way I can get access to either or both for free online?

bob jenkins

BillyMac wrote
I could not find an answer on previous Forum threads.

We had our local new rules meeting last week, and this was glossed over in a confusing manner,

You should have asked then. Or, raise them to your IAABO / state interpreter.

Maybe JRut can get an answer for IL 😉

BillyMac

bob jenkins wrote
You should have asked then.

I did, but I asked the wrong question. After start of period and technical fouls were mentioned, I asked about out of bounds at the division line and got a positive response, but I didn't specify which side, table or opposite table. I only became perplexed after I got home and read my IAABO manual.