[psycho_ref]

BktBallRef, good point, however the rule contradicts itself for 2 reasons.

1. By saying "A player from the team not in control...", suggests that there is only one team that is not in control, which we know is not true because during a jump and throw-in neither team is in control. (not necessarily as important as #2).

2. Leaving the bracketed situations, "A player from the team not in control (defensive player or during a jump ball or throwin)", suggests that these are the ONLY situations where there is no team control. Which is plain wrong. Either the bracketed situations should be removed, making the rule apply to all situations where there is no team control, or all situations should be listed, or it should be specified that these are examples of no team control and not the only situations.

You are right BktBallRef, "If the rule covered rebounders, it wouldn't need to be changed...", because all situations where there is no team control, would be listed (to the best of my knowledge). Although now Nevadaref brought up a good point about "during a jumpball", which I guess would also apply to a throw-in, which means if we specify the exceptions we would have to say "during or after a jump ball, until control is established", (same for throw-in), which would just be too long and redundant. I think the examples/exceptions should be taken out and we would refer to the Team Control definition, to know WHEN a team has control.

Assignmentmaker, why doesn't the 'exception' transfer to a second player during a throw-in?
Example: A1 is making a throw-in in A's front court, the throw-in is tipped uncontrollably by A2, and again by A3, and then A4 jumps from A's front court, catches the ball in midair, and lands in A's backcourt. Did you mean that this is a violation?

[Edited by psycho_ref on Mar 2nd, 2006 at 02:06 PM]