Quote:
Originally posted by Corndog89
MTD
I understand the logic of why this situation could be a violation, but I also understand why it wouldn't be a violation. The rules are not specific. There has been a page and a half of lawyer-like examination and extrapolation of individual words used in various rules references by several very experienced and intelligent officials. If Pres Clinton couldn't be sure what "it" means, how can we assume and be sure of what the rules-writers mean if they're not specific? JR's first and subsequent posts are indeed very persuasive and logical, and I certainly respect his interpretation...I'm just not completely sold.
As Snaqwells pointed out, if this much mental gymnastics is required--and this in a forum where we all have the advantage of time, hindsight, rules books to study and reference at our leisure, experience to call on, previous threads to address, etc, and we still can't reach agreement--then I can't see how I could call this a violation. I don't know what the answer is, but when I'm on the court and this happens, I'm not calling a violation and then have to play Perry Mason to defend my call to the offended coach, especially on a call that I'm not so sure of. On the other hand, if the other coach asks me why I didn't call a violation, I simply respond that he was still out of bounds and had not moved up the sideline. Besides, my guess is that the vast majority of coaches would never even realize that something "funny" had just happened.
Then of course, I may just chicken out and call a 5-second violation 
Having said all this, I'm going to bring this one up with my assoc leadership and see what they say. This is one of the reasons I read the forum almost every day...it makes you think about strange situations and how to handle them.
|
Corndog:
Sure the rules are specific. Just ask yourself the following question: What constitutes a legal throw-in? The answer is: The thrower must pass the ball such that it crosses the plane of the boundary line and touches a player on the court that is touching either inbounds or out-of-bounds. If A1 inbounds pass does not cross the plane of the boundary line so that it touches a player on the court that is touching either inbounds or out-of-bounds, A1 has committed a throw-in violation.
Lets go even further: A1 has the ball for a throw-in on the endline to his right of Team B's basket after a score by Team B. A2 is standing inbounds in the corner of Team A's backcourt that is to the left of Team B's basket. A1 passes the ball to A2 but the ball never crosses the vertical plane of the endline and touches out-of-bounds past the sideline extended. Has A1 committed a throw-in violation? Of course he has.
MTD, Sr.
[Edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. on Feb 13th, 2006 at 02:02 AM]