Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
This is a discussion that started on another website. I'm looking for some input here. I already know JR's opinion, so hold off for a while, JR.
B1 scores. While A1 is holding the ball OOB for the endline throw-in, A2 sets a screen near the endline. A3 runs OOB along the endline to go around the screen and re-enters the court inbounds. Is this a violation under new rule 9-3-2? Or is it legal b/c it's an endline throw-in and any teammate of the thrower can be OOB?
|
There's a variation on this theme, is there not?
A1 is throwing the ball in. B1 is defending, standing at the boundary line directly in front of A1. A2 stands right next to B1. A1 throws the ball in to A3, then steps around A2 to come in bounds, taking the shortest path possible in that particular direction.
This may violate the requirement that the player out-of-bounds come directly on to the court. (It's not a 'throw-in spot' violation, as I see it, the ball has been released).
But one jailhouse lawyer (uh, make that 'player') once argued to me that he couldn't come directly onto the court - that B1 was standing in his way, and (how beautiful is this!) that to wait for B1 to get out of his way violated his right to come on the court right away (right to a speedy trial . . .).
What I see as a gating problem with the application of the new rule 9-3-2 to the case you describe is that the screen occurs too far away in time after the initiating act. What if A2 goes out of bounds pure of heart, without intent to gain undue advantage. Subsequently, s/he changes her/his mind - say A1 is not on the same page and doesn't even look over at A2 - and, time running out, aborts the original plan and comes back in bounds as directly as is practicable, meaning not through defender B2, which would be illegal contact, but taking the shortest path possible, right next to A3, who happens to be there?