Quote:
Originally Posted by rwest
Rule 9-3-3 does not cover this. Intent is required. Every case play regarding this rule has the word intent except for 9.3.3.A, and even that one it is obvious that intent was there. So if you have a violation every time a player goes out of bounds then what do you have on this play? B1 steals the ball from A1 but in so doing loses his balance. Before stepping out of bounds he bats the ball ahead to B2 who has an unobstructed lane to the basket. Before B2 releases the ball on a shot, B1 steps out of bounds.
If your position is that stepping out of bounds is a violation, then you have to kill this play and award the ball to team A. Let's be consistent guys.
This is not a violation. Neither is the defender stepping out of bounds in the OP. We can't invent an interpretation of this rule to give us an out on calling the block. It's a block.
|
I'm not arguing that it should be called a violation? I was just asking where you see he was OOB for an authorized reason. You answered. THanks.
And to answer the play in your example, the player left b/c he lost his balance, that is the same as his momentum taking him OOB. He did not intentionally leave the floor. I don't think the player in the OP intentionally left the floor either, in which case I've got a BLOCK. Very easy call IMO that should not have generated 4 pages of debate.