Held ball during AP throw in

[frezer11]

There is actually a third scenario that ends the throw in, and it directly relates to this. If instead of tying the ball up, the team B player simply pulls the ball away from the offense, then he has gained possession and the throw in has subsequent ended. The ball was not thrown in bounds, nor did the offense violate.

A related question, can the thrower in reach the ball across the in bound plane, and hand the ball off to a teammate just over the line? My immediate thought is no, and I think I could probably support that with the rules, but why is a defender allowed to grab the ball in that same scenario legally and play on? Shouldn't the same rules apply to both teams here?

[deecee]

Originally Posted by frezer11

There is actually a third scenario that ends the throw in, and it directly relates to this. If instead of tying the ball up, the team B player simply pulls the ball away from the offense, then he has gained possession and the throw in has subsequent ended. The ball was not thrown in bounds, nor did the offense violate.

A related question, can the thrower in reach the ball across the in bound plane, and hand the ball off to a teammate just over the line? My immediate thought is no, and I think I could probably support that with the rules, but why is a defender allowed to grab the ball in that same scenario legally and play on? Shouldn't the same rules apply to both teams here?

Do you have rules or caseplay that support the part in red?

Where in the rules is the bold supported? We only have support for a held ball, there is none for a "steal".

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by deecee

do you have rules or caseplay that support the part in red?

Where in the rules is the bold supported? We only have support for a held ball, there is none for a "steal".

7.6.4 situation a

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by deecee

Do you have rules or caseplay that support the part in red?

Where in the rules is the bold supported? We only have support for a held ball, there is none for a "steal".

7.6.4:A
While attempting a throw in A1 holds the ball through the plane of the end line. B1 (a) slaps the ball from A1's hand(s); or (b) simply grabs the ball and then throws it through B's basket.

Ruling: In (a), no violation has occurred and play continues. In (b), score two points for B.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by OKREF

7.6.4:A
While attempting a throw in A1 holds the ball through the plane of the end line. B1 (a) slaps the ball from A1's hand(s); or (b) simply grabs the ball and then throws it through B's basket.

Ruling: In (a), no violation has occurred and play continues. In (b), score two points for B.

I wanted freezer to find that, mostly because he would then look further and figure out the answer to his second question regarding teammates and handoffs.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by deecee

I wanted freezer to find that, mostly because he would then look further and figure out the answer to his second question regarding teammates and handoffs.

I already knew the case play ruling, which is why I brought the original question up in the first place. But again I ask, is it legal to hand the ball off, such that both the player in bounds and the player out of bounds are both touching the ball at the same time? The case book ruling for a defender makes me say it's legal, but I want to see if anyone has a different ruling they can find that would disagree with that, as it's one of those things that doesn't seem to pass the eye test, so I want to have proper justification.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by frezer11

I already knew the case play ruling, which is why I brought the original question up in the first place. But again I ask, is it legal to hand the ball off, such that both the player in bounds and the player out of bounds are both touching the ball at the same time? The case book ruling for a defender makes me say it's legal, but I want to see if anyone has a different ruling they can find that would disagree with that, as it's one of those things that doesn't seem to pass the eye test, so I want to have proper justification.

7-6-2
The throw-in begins when the ball is at the disposal of a player of the team entitled to the throw in. The thrower shall release the ball on a pass directly into the court, except as in 7-5-7, within 5 seconds after the throw in begins.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by OKREF

7-6-2
The throw-in begins when the ball is at the disposal of a player of the team entitled to the throw in. The thrower shall release the ball on a pass directly into the court, except as in 7-5-7, within 5 seconds after the throw in begins.

And this is EXACTLY why I wanted to bring this up for discussion, as there seems to be separate interpretations in the case book and rules book. The defender is allowed to essentially take a handoff from the thrower by taking it out of his hands (legal by case book play 7.6.4A), yet if the offensive player does the same, then the thrower seems to have violated by rule 7-6-2. So which ruling should apply for the offensive player?

Also, and I realize that the case book play deems it legal, so we need to officiate as such, but why is it not a violation on the thrower in when the defender take the ball from them? They have not completed a throw-in as defined by the rule book.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by OKREF

7.6.4:A
While attempting a throw in A1 holds the ball through the plane of the end line. B1 (a) slaps the ball from A1's hand(s); or (b) simply grabs the ball and then throws it through B's basket.

Ruling: In (a), no violation has occurred and play continues. In (b), score two points for B.

Note however that if B makes contact with A in this situation, it's an intentional foul (by rule)

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Note however that if B makes contact with A in this situation, it's an intentional foul (by rule)

Yes, unless the player throwing in the ball, makes,(or initiates) contact with the defender, like throwing his arms into the defender. I'm going to make sure that the defender makes contact with the offense.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Note however that if B makes contact with A in this situation, it's an intentional foul (by rule)

Yes....and a stupid one too.

It should only apply for contact that occurs through the plane, not when the thrower puts the ball/arms on the inbounds side of the plane where the defense IS permitted to play the ball.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yes....and a stupid one too.

It should only apply for contact that occurs through the plane, not when the thrower puts the ball/arms on the inbounds side of the plane where the defense IS permitted to play the ball.

I agree with this. If the offense puts it across the line it should be no foul.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by OKREF

I agree with this. If the offense puts it across the line it should be no foul.

Mainly agree. If the defender hits arms, not ball, then it should be a foul still, but not an intentional.

[deecee]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Yes....and a stupid one too.

It should only apply for contact that occurs through the plane, not when the thrower puts the ball/arms on the inbounds side of the plane where the defense IS permitted to play the ball.

That's not how the rule reads.

PENALTIES: (Art. 10)
1. The first violation of the throw-in boundary-line plane by an opponent(s) of
the thrower shall result in a team warning for delay being given (one delay
warning per team per game). The warning does not result in the loss of the
opportunity to move along the end line when and if applicable.
2. The second or additional violations will result in a technical foul assessed
to the offending team. See 10-1-5c Penalty.
3. If an opponent(s) reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and
touches or dislodges the ball while in possession of the thrower or being
passed to a teammate outside the boundary line (as in 7-5-7), a technical
foul shall be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required. See
10-3-10 Penalty.
4. If an opponent(s) contacts the thrower, an intentional personal foul shall
be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required

There is no stipulation that it must be behind the boundary plane.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by deecee

That's not how the rule reads.

PENALTIES: (Art. 10)
1. The first violation of the throw-in boundary-line plane by an opponent(s) of
the thrower shall result in a team warning for delay being given (one delay
warning per team per game). The warning does not result in the loss of the
opportunity to move along the end line when and if applicable.
2. The second or additional violations will result in a technical foul assessed
to the offending team. See 10-1-5c Penalty.
3. If an opponent(s) reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and
touches or dislodges the ball while in possession of the thrower or being
passed to a teammate outside the boundary line (as in 7-5-7), a technical
foul shall be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required. See
10-3-10 Penalty.
4. If an opponent(s) contacts the thrower, an intentional personal foul shall
be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required

There is no stipulation that it must be behind the boundary plane.

He's not saying it is. Just stating, in his opinion, that he believes if the offense puts the ball across the line, it shouldn't be an intentional foul. I don't think he is inferring anything different than what the rule is.