Quote:
Originally posted by Self
9-2-2...Fail to pass the ball directly INTO the court so it touches..... Key word being into, since you must be out of bounds to pass it into.
9-2-6... Touch the ball in the court before it touches or is touched by another player. Well if A1 is throwing the ball he becomes the thrower. So if he is on the court throwing it he is the fisrt to touch it in the court.
No to be sarcastic but, this is a little amazing to me that we still have people saying this is not a violation. We have had the highest people in IAABO and NFHS say that it is a violation and point numerous rules that the decision is based on. I don't understand now why we still can't agree that it is.
What rules are the doubters using to say it is not a violation?
|
The rule the doubters are using is 4-41-3. That is, the throw-in hasn't started, so it can't be a violation.
Suppose, in the original example, A1 threw to A2 who then took the ball out of bounds for a "throw-in." Would you have a violation? Why not? How is that different from the original play?
If B requests TO before A has released the ball, do you grant it? If it's a "throw-in" then you can't. Have you started your count?
I agree that A "did something wrong." What they did wrong was violate a rule that, IMHO, doesn't have a specific penalty.
If I were on the rules committee (and I'm not), I'd vote for a "do-over" with a caution (to avoid using the word "warning") that if it happens again it could be construed as a delay of game (10-1-5b). I think that's what Dick Knox was referring to.
Now, to be clear, I'm not saying that your interpretation is wrong or is other than what the NFHS wants. Just that I'll wait for the rules committee to resolve the issue (so far, Dick is on one side and Mary is on the other).