Inbound pass hits referee OOB

[BlueDevilRef]

So.....the ball touching an official inbounds is same as touching the floor at that spot.......but touching a person who is out of bounds is not the same as touching the floor on that spot?

Silly to me, some of these rules are.


I wish I had a cool signature

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

but touching a person who is out of bounds is not the same as touching the floor on that spot?

If it was, then perhaps B could cause a violation by standing in the FC and using his one "hot stove touch" to contact A who was standing in the BC.

Or, if B was on the boundary line and touched A who was touching the ball ...

However, note that if A is OOB for a throw-in and reaches over the boundary line and contact B, it's a violation on A (per interp)

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Inadvertently
touching someone who is out of bounds, without gaining an advantage, is not
considered a violation.

The lack of a clear standard here is a problem.
There isn't actually a rule which states that touching an OOB person is a violation. We would have no concrete rule basis for making such a call. We would have to fall back on 2-3 and the phrase at the beginning of the book about not permitting any player to gain an advantage not intended by the rules.
Plus, if one does make a call in this situation, then there is the issue of what penalty to enforce. Is it a violation? Is it an unsporting technical foul?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

However, note that if A is OOB for a throw-in and reaches over the boundary line and contact B, it's a violation on A (per interp)

That was an awful interpretation. There is no justification for it. I recall that the NFHS actually stated that the thrower gained inbounds status by touching the defender, which is completely untrue.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

So.....the ball touching an official inbounds is same as touching the floor at that spot.......but touching a person who is out of bounds is not the same as touching the floor on that spot?

Silly to me, some of these rules are.


I wish I had a cool signature

I can't tell if you're confused or just being sarcastic, so I'll make sure:

The ball touching an official is inbounds if the official is entirely inbounds, or out of bounds if any part of the official is touching on or outside a boundary. This much is true. But the ball handler, and thus the ball, is not out of bounds if said ball handler touches an official (or any other person) who is located on or outside a boundary.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

Silly to me, some of these rules are.

[BlueDevilRef]

Let me be clear about these things. Unless otherwise stated, I understand the rule. But as I have stated before, understanding and adjudicating it correctly do not preclude being discerning about a rule. To me, it sometimes seems there is a double talk taking place in basketball rules that I don't see in softball.

As in, touching the bleachers while inbounds with the ball makes you OOB but touching a cheerleader/official/cameraman does not? Seems contradictory to me.


I wish I had a cool signature

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BlueDevilRef

... but touching a cheerleader/official/cameraman does not?

Player touching the police officer in the corner isn't out of bounds, but touching his K-9 police dog would be out of bounds.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Player touching the police officer in the corner isn't out of bounds, but touching his K-9 police dog would be out of bounds.

dogs are people, too . . .