[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by ODog

Girls JV game:

A1 has a spot throw-in in her backcourt on the endline at the tableside free-throw lane line. She takes a step or two back and fires a rocket that hits the back of the backboard padding before it reaches the court. My partner is administering and is not looking up, but rather at A1 and other players nearby. I'm out slightly beyond the 3-pt. line (Team B was pressing), had the call, pointed and whistled out of bounds. Everybody's fine; no beefs.

At halftime as we're headed to the locker room, a veteran varsity official (I'd say at least 30 years' experience) seated on the far sideline from where the throw-in occurred asks us what we had. He was there as a fan. I told him I judged the ball to have hit the back of the backboard. He responded by saying "but the backboard's in play." I said, "Not the back of it."

Then he said the ball couldn't possibly have hit the back because it wound up on the court instead of back out of bounds. I explained it hit the foam padding and of course it could hit the back of that and still continue forward. My partner agreed and we offered to demonstrate. He urged us to discuss this with our interpreter and almost made it seem/implied our board had come to some understanding/agreement that any ball that hits any part of the backboard yet somehow winds up on the court is deemed to have arrived there legally and is in play.

Naturally, my partner and I disagree, since the foam padding is not going to prevent a ball thrown hard enough from maintaining its forward momentum (either from out to in or from in to out). It really became a physics discussion more than a rules discussion. It was friendly and civil, but both sides were entrenched in their positiions.

Thoughts?

Where exactly was the spot throw in? Was it administered properly?