Quote:
Originally posted by LarryS
Quote:
Originally posted by JRutledge
And just like Chuck stated, we discussed the possibility of an AP and OOB ruling.
|
I think I would have gone with OOB, but can see where an argument could be made for an AP situation because the ball lodged between the rim and backboard.
This sounds like an area where you could go either way, [/B]
|
Actually, I never discussed the possibility of it being an AP situation. However, I think that you can actually make a case for the AP. You've only got 2 choices regarding the status of the "equipment" above the floor. Either it's in play or it's OOB (as I outlined in my last post). If the equipment is OOB, then the inbounder has committed a throw-in violation. I don't think there's any controversy about saying that.
If, however, you say that the equipment is in play, then you have a different situation. You have a throw-in that simply hasn't ended. The ball is live but there's no possession. So if you blow the whistle, you have created a dead ball when there is no team control. That would result in an AP procedure.
I would not rule that way, but I could at least see the logic of it if somebody wanted to go that way. Personally, I think that the "equipment" above the court is OOB and would call a throw-in violation.
Chuck