Throw-in question
 

Our study guide was totally redone this year, apparently with the intent of making it significantly more difficult to earn our ratings and the recent pay raise. The study guide was 150 questions, and the test was 70. Some were taken directly from the guide, while others were tweaked to make sure you learned the rule as opposed to memorizing the questions. There was no official answer key, but our assignor obtained an answer sheet from an outside source and posted it for our consideration and to stimulate discussion. I disagreed with 11 out of the 150 true/false answers given. The following question was on the guide, and also appeared on my test. Everybody did not get the same test, as I understand it.

During a throw-in in the frontcourt on the sideline by the bench, B1, defending the pass right along the sideline, deflects the pass up in the air, and the ball enters the basket. Because the throw-in has not ended and team control was not established inbounds, the administering official signals the ball dead and disallows the 3 point basket.

True or false

bad question as you know. The throw in has ended when the ball is touched by B1. it doesnt matter that team control wasnt established inbounds. the ball isnt dead. it would never be a 3 point goal because it wasnt a try. it would count as a two assuming time did not expire.
the question overall has to be false.

False.

score 2 point basket because the throw in did end but it was not a shot attempt.

This was such a bad question that I didn't know what to think. If you say it's false that they disallowed the 3 point basket does that mean that they scored a 3 point basket? It obviously should be false that the ball should be ruled dead.

THERE WAS NO 3 POINT BASKET TO DISALLOW. I have issues here no matter what the "correct" answer turns out to be.

i knew the 3 point thing was the issue. what you have to do is break it down. There were 3 things that were wrong and then we get to the goofy part. you know the first things cant be true. dead wrong. have to go with that when you see the goofy part.

in another way, you just know the question cant be true so it has to be false. test writers dont think many times...

lets have another one of the 11 if you have time

I am not an official. As with all similar questions, I am assuming "true or false" to mean "true or false: the administering official is correct."

The answer is FALSE, because for it to be TRUE, then the rationale of "the throw-in has not ended" must be the correct reason a 3-point basket is not scored.

Officials observing the court during the pre-game notice that the chairs used for team benches are placed in front of the existing permanent bleachers and that there is only 3 feet of open space in front of the empty chairs. The officials rule that this bench area is legal for the game.

True or False


Spaces for non-jumpers and free throw lane spaces along the free throw lane are the same width and depth.

True or False

I would answer true for both questions in post #8.

I have false for the 2nd one.

The jump circle "spaces" don't have a width. Players within 3 feet of the circle can be at any interval they wish as long as one is not behind the other.

Occupied Space ???
 

I was ready to dispute this, but found that Camron Rust is correct. I cannot find any NFHS reference, in either the rulebook, or the casebook, stating that the spaces around the jump ball circle are three feet wide.

The only reference that I could find regarding the width of these spaces is in the IAABO mechanics manual, in diagram form, in the diagram labeled Court As The Official Views It.

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5791/2...cffc1093_m.jpg

I'm pretty good in regard to basketball rules, so why was I so quick to dispute Camron Rust? Has this rule changed over the past thirty-five years, or have I (and Nevadaref, a rules guru if there ever was one) been the victim of another basketball rule myth?

just another ref: What was the answer on the answer sheet, and did it include a reference, or a citation?

Want to chime in on this Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.?

True for the first one. 3 feet is supposed to be the minimum. false for the second one for reasons Cameron stated. As far as width for non jumpers, I do believe non jumpers have to stay within their frame…stay in their spot--cant spread their legs out wide to take up more room. They are entitled to a "spot" on floor not multiple spots.

There has never (with apologies to the late J. Dallas Shirley), as far I back as my rules books go, a dimension stated in the rules. What one will find is references to unmarked Lane Spaces along the FT Lane (Yes, young ones, in The Ancient Days some of the FT Lane Spaces were unmarked) and FT Circle.

I do not remember at any time Spaces around the Center Circle and the FT Circles (note: Jump Balls for Held Balls during The Ancient Days) dimensions given for these spaces.

Camron is correct, and I am sure Nevada or Jeff or Tony will confirm.

MTD, Sr.

Could Someone Please Help Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Find His Keys ???
 

So? You can't even remember what you had for breakfast this mourning.

I Liked It Better When I Thought It Was Three Feet ...
 

Sounds logical, but, citation please.

I am in mourning because both the YSU Penguins and The OSU Buckeyes football teams lost yesterday on tie-breaking FGs with no time left on the clock, :(.

MTD, Sr.

screening definition contains stance shoulder width language.

Thanks ...
 

4-40: A screen is legal action by a player who, without causing contact, delays or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position. To establish a legal screening position: The screener must stay within his/her vertical plane with a stance approximately shoulder width apart.

Nice citation BigCat.

Great Minds Think Alike ...
 

Nevadaref: I'm still trying to figure out why we both answered true for the jump ball circle three foot width space question?

Any insight?

It does, but what does that have to do with how a player stands for the jump ball?

The answer key which he sent said true for both, but I say false for both.

As for the first, 1-2-1 says 3 feet of unobstructed space. The question says there are 3 feet of space in front of the empty chairs. Where do the players put their feet? This is a classic example of something which will never be significant anywhere other than on the test.

As for the second, as pointed out by others, the spaces for non-jumpers have no width, and even if they did, if the (imaginary) lines defining the spaces emanate from a circle the result would be a trapezoidal effect, so any way you slice it, they are not the same as free throw spaces.

If a player is standing with his feet way wide, beyond shoulder width, to simply take up more space on the circle AND an opponent wants part of the space i will make the player take a normal stance. it is an example of what i consider to be the "spot" that every player is entitled to....

Big Cat:

And you would be wrong. You would be attempting to apply a rule that does not exist.

MTD, Sr.

I dont think i'm wrong. IF a player tries to take up a ton of room by spreading his legs out and another player wants part of the space i will make him take normal stance. we have example in screen rule about what proper stance looks like. also, verticality, rebounding defintions. i think my interpretation is reasonable.

Big Cat:

You are trying to apply the Screening Rule to a non-screening situation. Stop trying to apply a rule that does NOT exist.

MTD, Sr.

I'm reading the rules as a whole. Screening, verticality, rebounding....when you read them as a whole you get a picture of what a legal stance is or isnt. Again, if a player spreads his legs way wide just to take up more space and another player wants part of it then i will make the player adjust.

It's Odd, But It Involves Screening Principles ...
 

Because screening is defined as action by a player who, without causing contact, delays, or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position, like a desired position on the jump ball circle.

Mark, let me ask you this. Suppose two team B players are in adjacent positions around the circle. we know if team A desires in between they are entitled to it. How much room would you give A to get between the B players. 6 inches...6 feet? i bet youd tell the B players to separate enough so that the A player could get in with a normal stance, shoulder width etc...

Big Cat:

What part of the rules do you not understand? This is not a screening situation. You canNOT apply the screening rule to a non-screening situation. I know I am a bald old geezer but you need to listen when this bald old geezer speaks.

MTD, Sr.

Big Cat:

Yes. But what is your point with regard to the original situation that we are discussing?

MTD, Sr.

you are defining what a reasonable amount of space is when you separate them so a player can get in between. to allow any player to spread his legs on the circle as wide as he can, just because he gets there first, isnt consistent with rules as a whole. Screening, verticality etc.

I will always "listen" to what you say. I wont always agree. I dont here if you would allow a player to spread his legs way wide etc. and an opponent wanted in.

Screening ...
 

Why not? Screening is defined as action by a player who, without causing contact, delays, or prevents an opponent from reaching a desired position, like a desired position on the jump ball circle.

A nonjumper wanting a desired spot on the jump ball circle certainly falls under the screening definition. Said player wants the desired spot, and wants to prevent an opponent from taking that desired spot.

The reason this isn't about screening is because this jockeying for position is taking place before the ball is live. I don't think you're going to call contact with this guy who happens to be standing with his legs spread wide intentional or flagrant, are you?

So, you're calling a foul?

I Really Liked It Better When I Thought It Was Three Feet ...
 

Agree, but what is the rule basis for this interpretation, if it really doesn't involve screening?

True ???
 

Was there a reference, or a citation, for the true answer for the jump ball circle three foot width space question?

what i have said is that, although the rules dont specifically provide a width for non jumpers on the circle, i do not believe that it is unlimited. just as i dont believe that separating two b players on the circle by only 6 to 8 inches would be enough. Mark agreed, and i think most would, that we would make the B players separate enough that A could take a normal stance. i dont think any of us would separate the B players so that A could spread his legs way wide.

What is considered a normal stance? we see examples in the screening rule--shoulder width...we know in verticality player stays in their cylinder etc. when a player is rebounding he cant stick arms or legs out abnormally. these are examples of players in proper positions. i think it is reasonable to interpret the width for non jumpers as a normal stance for that player.

If a player gets to the circle first and takes up that space by spreading his legs, he is doing nothing illegal. If you make him pull his right leg in, what's preventing him from spreading his left leg out to create the same stance?

1-3-1 tells us spaces are 36 inches deep. There is no mention of width, here or anywhere else, as far as I know.

if he is spread wayy wide and another player wants a spot i will tell him to take a normal stance. He will decide which leg he pulls in. if there is no one on the side of him he can do what he wants.

i've not seen anyone so spread out in 30 years that would make me say anything.

How about this? He has to allow the opponent a position between him and his teammate. That's the only restriction. He has to move in such a way that creates a space. He can stand any way he wants. Standing in such a way may or may not make this player more likely to foul when the ball does become live. Deal with that when it happens.

I'm trying to figure out how you would know another player wants that spot between his legs. If he is already standing there with his legs spread, and 2 opponents stand on either side of him, what is your indication they want some portion of the area he is occupying?

I think this is the most important part of this discussion.

a player would have to say something. and the other player would have to be wayy wide. if two B players are 10 inches apart and an A said i want in what would you do? we have no width for non jumpers. is that 10 inches enough? A can stand in there sideways. as i said earlier, i would make them move to allow A to take a normal stance.

im simply saying that although, we have no specific width for non jumper spots it is reasonable to say they are the width of the players normal stance. that's what we do when we separate them.

agreed. this is all theory..

If a player is spreading his legs out that far, it seems he would be limiting himself more than gaining an advantage. Let 'em.

I'll consult some of my past sources, but I believe that the spaces are intended to be close to three feet wide, but can't by rule because they are curved and thus shorter at the circle than 36 inches away from it.
In other words, they couldn't put the exact width in the book without using 2Pi r.
It's just a geometry thing.

Any given space for a Non-Jumper is three feet deep, which means that we can think of an imaginary circle which has the same Center as the Center Circle but has a radius of nine feet.

MTD, Sr.

Lets address the other topic getting lost in this post...does this action (wide stance) constitute "screening"?

no it isn't. i only mentioned it as an example of what a proper stance looks like. The rules don't expressly provide an exact width for non jumper spaces around the restraining circle. I don't think it is 6 feet and i don't think it is 12 inches. I think based on other rules in the book, screening, rebounding, verticality it's approximately the width of the players normal stance. that sounds reasonable to me when i consider the book as a whole.

This is all theory. i've never seen it happen in a game. i just made a comment that i don't think the spaces widths are unlimited.