[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The player may be violating 9-3, but in legalistic terms he also may not be. Here is the mental leap that you have to take.

If this were a normal play during the course of the game, with a live ball that was thrown from inbounds, then only 9-3 would apply to the situation and the ruling would be simple. However, this play clearly occurs DURING A THROW-IN and there are specific provisions that govern the thrown-in. They are listed in 9-2. One of them is 9-2-10.

Now the case could very well be made that during the throw-in those provisions are the ones that have priority and the other rules which may conflict with them are temporarily suspended until the throw-in ends. It is like having a special subset of rules that are only in effect for a very short amount of time. Using that way of thinking the player is not committing an OOB violation per 9-3, rather he is breaking a throw-in rule, specifically 9-2-10, and we need to enforce the penalty for that.

Viewed in that way, there is no conflict between the two rules. 9-3 simply doesn't apply to this situation. It would begin to apply only after the throw-in has ended.

If this was the intent, it would have been easy to list the exception in 9-3.
Since this was not done, it seems to leave the door open to individual interpretation. I believe that in this case 9-3 is the logical answer.