Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
My reference to "inbounds or out of bounds" was based on 7-6-1, which states that the throw-in must touch another player inbounds or OOB before going OOB untouched (similarly in 9-2-2). I had incorrectly assumed that the "or OOB" was also included in the definition of when the throw-in ends. But it's not.
I'm sorry if I've confused people. I'm a little confused myself now. How could the throw-in NOT end if it is caught by a player who has one foot OOB?  It's not a throw-in violation, right? B/c the thrower has not violated 9-2-2. Hmmmmm.
So A1 has the ball OOB for an AP throw-in. A1 throws the ball and A3 catches the ball with one foot OOB. We have to switch the arrow here, right? But if we say that the throw-in doesn't end when A3 catches it OOB, then we can't switch the arrow. So why isn't that "or OOB" included in the definition of when the throw-in ends?
I must be missing something obvious.
|
Maybe it's the early hour, but 7-6-1 makes almost no sense to me. What is the deal with "inbounds or out of bounds?" With the exception of 7-5-7, which is called out as an exception, how can it possibly be legal to throw-in to a player who is OOB? After reading 9.2.2 B I thought maybe it was referring to the throw-in team catching/touching the ball on the OOB side of the plane. But that is called out seperately as well in 7-6-1. So to what does the "or out of bounds" refer?
BTW, the inclusion of "inbounds or out of bounds" as a parenthetical to the phrase "on the court" in both 9-2-2 and 7-6-1 seems to directly contradict the recent FED interpretations of playing the game "on the court" as meaning "within the boundaries" that gave us the infamous foot on the line block, etc.
The AP throw-in rule is similar to 7-5-7 in that they both treat the end of the throw-in and violations as sepearate possible outcomes and explicitly provide for either. In this case, the AP throw-in ends when the violation occurs, reverse the arrow.
[Edited by Back In The Saddle on Feb 3rd, 2006 at 11:56 AM]