The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2015, 03:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: In the offseason.
Posts: 12,263
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref View Post
There is a reason that you don't see that called.
The reason is that this is not a violation. It's a technical foul.
You kicked the rule.
I strongly wish they'd change this one to a violation. It really doesn't seem any different than a player leaving the court without authorization. Much like the swinging elbows, more officials would be willing to call it if it were a violation. The infraction isn't severe enough to rise to the level of a T.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com
Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2015, 07:11am
Esteemed Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 23,379
Great Minds Think Alike ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
I strongly wish they'd change this one to a violation. It really doesn't seem any different than a player leaving the court without authorization. Much like the swinging elbows, more officials would be willing to call it if it were a violation. The infraction isn't severe enough to rise to the level of a T.
I completed all the paperwork to get this changed this past off season. My suggested change actually made its way onto the agenda for the rules committee to consider, but my change was not accepted. My change would have made the penalty (a violation) for a player stepping out of bounds to gain an advantage the same as a throwin player delaying being out of bounds to gain an advantage.

NFHS 9-3-3: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)

NFHS 10-3-2: A player shall not: Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) Two free throws plus ball for division-line throw-in.

Change 10-3-2 from a technical foul to a violation. Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds should carry the same penalty as leaving the court for an unauthorized reason.

NFHS 9-3-3-B: A player shall not purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)


Should I give it another try after this season?
__________________
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

“I was in prison and you came to visit me.” (Matthew 25:36)

Last edited by BillyMac; Fri Nov 20, 2015 at 07:51pm.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2015, 07:50am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 674
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac View Post
I completed all the paperwork to get this changed this past off season.

Should I give it another try after this season?
IMHO, Yes.
__________________
THE FLY IS OPEN, LET'S GO PEAY
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2015, 09:57am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 127
Should I give it another try after this season?[/QUOTE]

Absolutely!
What's the reasoning behind this rule?

I can see this being good strategy at the end of a game if you have a poor free throw shooter that you needed/wanted to keep in the game. A team could have the poor free throw shooter inbounds the ball and just stay out of bounds... especially with all contact on the inbounder being an intentional foul.
Not saying it makes perfect sense, but is one possible justification?
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Thu Nov 19, 2015, 11:11am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 18,191
I agree. I don't know if you submitted it directly, or through your state, but my guess is that suggestions from the State carry more weight than suggestions from an individual referee / coach.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2016 NCAA Rule Change: OBS - "About to Receive" vs. "In the act of Catching" teebob21 Softball 15 Wed Mar 02, 2016 10:16pm
NHSF "intentional" vs NCAA "flagarent" terminology Duffman Basketball 17 Wed Feb 08, 2012 10:15pm
Is "the patient whistle" and "possession consequence" ruining the game? fiasco Basketball 46 Fri Dec 02, 2011 08:43am
OT: Calling the official a "hater" and "loser" bainsey Basketball 35 Wed Sep 14, 2011 03:53pm
ABC's "Nightline" examines "worst calls ever" tonight pizanno Basketball 27 Fri Jul 04, 2008 06:08am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:39pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1