[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Earlier in this thread BktBallRef gave the criteria for starting the five second count for a throw-in. I will post them again:

Quoting:

BktBallRef: When the ball is on the floor and B is making no effort to pick it up and inbound it, I begin my count.

When the ball is in the hands of a member of the throwing team and he doesn't step OOB, I begin my count.

When the ball is at the disposal and the throwing team bats the ball, I begin my count.


In the play that started this thread, when B1 slapped the ball rather than grab it and take it out of bounds to start her team's throw-in, the ball became at the disposal of Team B. The covering official should start his five second count, if B1's slapping of the ball made it difficult for her or one of her teammates to recover the ball, too bad, and the official should not stop the clock to allow a player from Team B to recover the ball. B1 made a stupid decision and has to live with it. The official should not issue any type of delay of game warning because B1's action does not warrant it. B1 is only guilty of stupidity.


Addressing the ruling by one State Assn. as opposed to another State Assn. There can only be one interpretation for the whole country because the rule is the same for the whole country. I can tell you from personal experience, that there are state interpreters that have made incorrect interpretations because they did not know what the rule book said. One year, the MichiganHSAA interpreter said that a team could not substitute before the first free throw of a technical foul. He flat out told me that the rules said he was right and that I was wrong. It took emails by me to him and the NFHS Rules Editor to convince him.

This year when the NFHS posted the 2001-02 Basketball Rules Interpretations on the NFHS website, the Ruling for Situation 18 was incorrect, and when I emailed Mary Struckhoff and Dick Knox, they told me that the Ruling was correct and I was wrong. It took a second email to them telling them that the there was already a Casebook Play that contradicted the Ruling for Situation 18, before they agreed with me and corrected the Ruling.