How many points for dunking from the 3-point line?
 

If a player jumps from behind the 3-point line and dunks the ball, how many points are awarded?

OK, dumb hypothetical play but, BY RULE, what is correct answer, 2 or 3 points?

Oh, and what about dunking a free throw? Shooter can't cross line until ball makes contact with rim/backboard after release but if dunking, there is no release until it has made contact or gone through the rim.

Yes, I know, they are dumb plays that can't happen. Just thinking too much this X-Mas morning prepping for day of NBA follies.

Simple Answers ...
 

Three points for field goal. Why not (other than the rules of biology and physics)?

Illegal for free throw.

9-1: The free thrower shall not have either foot beyond the vertical plane of the
edge of the free-throw line which is farther from the basket or the free throw
semicircle line ... The restrictions in 9-1-3b through g apply until the ball touches the
ring or backboard or until the free throw ends.

However, this may be legal for dunking a free throw:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...tic_Man_17.jpg

Admittedly, but sometimes such off-the-wall plays illustrate rules that are important to know. And when called upon to adjudicate a play based on those rules we don't have time to think, "What was the rule on this again?" You asked a couple of questions about which it would be tempting just to leave this discussion with just the answers. Dig into the rule book to find out why and what the rule references are on these and similar plays. That knowledge will make it easier to adjudicate other situations that are more common when they happen. (Hint: feet in relation to the plane of the various kinds of lines that come into play...) I know these questions will compel me to review a few on my own. Merry Christmas!

If you did a dunk like Blake Griffin or Jordan of the Clippers, then I cannot see how you can justify anything but a 2 point shot.

Just imagine this dunk from the 3 point line.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/3w_Vy0lDk_A" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Peace

Not correct.
If the player jumps from behind the 3-pt line, the try is worth three points.

What is not correct? I said unless there is a dunk where the ball is not released until the ball is in the hoop, I cannot see a ruling that supports giving 3 points for a dunk.

I stand by that comment, which is why I gave a specific video reference. If you disagree, show some evidence that is incorrect. Otherwise we are debating something that so far is nearly impossible. Last time I checked, you are not an official person on this issue anymore than I am.

Peace

The only aspect that matters is player location. Player location is determined by where the player was last in contact with the floor. So, again, if the player jumps from behind the three-point line, the try is worth three points. It doesn't matter how close to the basket the ball is released. That is not relevant.

What is written in the rules is all that is needed to show that you are wrong. Of course, you will never admit it.

While we're speaking hypothetically, (and that's all this is) how often do you see a player dunk without contacting the rim? When this happens, wouldn't that be the same as touching the floor inside the line? Two points.

I am aware of this and why I said that the dunk video would be a 3 if it happened. It is technically a dunk by definition, but was clearly released before touching the rim or in this case not touching the rim at all. I actually think in this very hypothetical situations (with my comments about the video) it would be a 3 unless there was an interpretation that suggested that any dunk would not apply as a 3 point shot.

Otherwise I have not seen many dunks where the rim is not touched on some level.

Nothing to admit, I think the video would fit part of the discussion we are having. Stop talking as if you are the authority on the issue, you are not. But you will never stop doing that either. ;)

Peace

At the HS level or college level almost never. I have only seen a couple of high profile dunks at the NBA level that did not actually touch the rim. And those situations had to be pointed out that they "May not have been a dunk" because the rim was never touched. But by definition in both college and HS, you do not need the rim to be touched to have a dunk (for example: fitting the definition of a dunk for pre-game purposes).

I also do not think we will ever get a real resolution to this as this is such a hypothetical that it is not likely going to happen in our lifetime or under the current rules of basketball.

Peace

This is so laughable. The master of double-speak is now changing the number of points that's he's awarding and claiming that he has been correct all along!
I'm not wasting any more of my time arguing with this fool. Everyone can see that he wrote 2 in his first post.

I said I thought the video was a 3 if we are using the standard from the hypothetical.

You are so worried about every little detail I say, you seem like you need a better partner in life. ;)

Peace

Um, why?

Rut, you clearly said before that you think it would be two. Go back and re-read them, edit them if you'd like, but what you said there does not match what you're saying here.

And I can't for the life of me figure out what difference it makes whether the dunk was released prior to the shooter touching the rim.

This is clearly a three, by rule, whether the ball is released prior to the shooter touching the rim or it's what we all think of as a dunk. As long as the shooter jumped from behind the three point line, then it's a three point shot. Touching the rim does't change that.

The rim is inside the 3 point line.

I think a regular dunk would be 2 points. I think the dunk in the video would be 3 if it happened the way the video took place.

I think it matters if you consider touching the rim matters changes the status of the location on the court. I would also think if this was possible, the rules would change to make the rules very clear that a dunk would not be a 3. But it is not possible at this point without some technology that we have not seen yet.

Peace

It's not touching the floor in the 2 point area. You are where you are until you get where you're going. It would be a 3 point dunk if this was at all possible.

If touching the rim meant you were at the location of the rim, then in every NBA stadium you would be out of bounds. The rim is attached to the stanchion which is only touching out of bounds.

OK, I'm going to have to unpack my rule book after moving, but I'm pretty sure the location of an airborne player is defined strictly by where he last touched the floor. I'll be shocked if there's any reference to the rim there.

There isn't, because it never mattered...............until now. :D

And since it's not there, it's (touching the rim) not relevant to the rule. If they change the rule, then it could be a two point shot, but until then, it's 3.

Actually, 4-35-4 says "....the floor, or an extension of the floor, such as a bleacher."

I would say that is the applicable rule.

And the rim is not an extension of the floor. Hell, half the time the rim isn't even attached to the floor.

Extensions of the floor would be bleachers, table, benches.

The backboard has inbounds status, therefore, so does the rim. If it has status with regard to inbounds/out of bounds, it must also have status with regard to inside/outside the line.

4-4-5: A ball which touches the front faces or edges of the backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds.

Well it would matter if this was possible. But we are talking about a hypothetical that is likely to never happen.

Peace

Is it?

Not necessarily.

The rim could be neutral....in fact I think it has to be.

Why?

If the rim were treated the same as the floor inside the 3 point arc, all tries would end when the ball hit the rim and any 3 that wasn't net-only would become a 2 when the ball hit the rim. Of course, that isn't the case. So, I suggest that the rim (and backboard too), while inbounds, is neither in the 2 point area nor the 3 point area.

They have a rule in place for when a jump ball ends by definition that involves hitting the backboard and the rim. That was a not a change in the rule from when they did jump balls at FT lane area. I would think that if this was possible, the rule would be clarified with previous rules or new interpretations, followed by new rules. I have no idea if what I am saying would be right as it is not ever happened to my knowledge and no such issue has been raised realistically. We are speculating on what really would be the interpretation and yes that would matter like other things do somethings in the rules. But I would not think in the effort of fairness that the rules committees would keep awarding a 3 point shot for a dunk attempt without some clarification. Nothing to be upset about, we are strictly talking about a very big leap in how the game is actually played now.

Peace

This would be an excellent point if we were talking about ball location, but we're not. We're talking about player location.

When I dunk the ball, it, the ball, actually leaves my hand a split second before my hand hits the rim. Also, if anybody can do that they deserve 3 points.

Ps. It's a nerf ball...with a rim on the back of a door but same principles apply..:p

1. On 99% of dunks the ball is released prior to the player's hand(s) making contact with the ring.

2. By rule, contact with the backboard or basket has nothing to do with player location. Here's a test case for everyone: A1 jumps from out of bounds along the frontcourt end line. While airborne A1 touches the side of the backboard with one hand and then grabs a rebound and tosses the ball into the basket before landing on the court. Is this a good goal or an out of bounds violation?

I would say that's one helluva good goal. Unfortunately, it wouldn't count. Would you assess a T for touching the backboard to gain an advantage? 😃

It's a T. The advantage gained was that he used the touch of the board to keep from getting an out of bounds violation. :)


Try this one, which is slightly more conceivable. A1 throws an errant pass which is headed out of bounds behind the board. A2 goes up in an attempt to save it and touches the back of the board just before touching the ball. Is this a violation?

I'm forgetful now, too many presents today: who was it that said "when a dunk is worth three, I'll start doing it"?


I wish I had a cool signature

It is not a violation. It is out of bounds if the BALL hits the back of the backboard. The rim and backboard are physically located inside 3 point line but not relevant to player location. Last in contact with floor or extension of floor. Most high school rims and backboards are extensions of the ceiling or sidewall.

I am not so sure about that percentage since I doubt there was a study done on the topic. A lot of dunks involve you having some contact with the rim while releasing the ball. Especially the big aggressive dunks.

Peace

I can tell many of us must be bored as this will never happen in my lifetime and I doubt anyone here and their life time or we might have to do some big time drug testing.

I will worry about this when it happens to someone else. Until then it is really a discussion in futility.

Peace

You are absolutely right. Here is the value in all this gibberish. It caused me to search through rules that I "already knew." I did not realize that the rule for out of bounds was separated in such a way for ball vs. player. I still don't really see the value in knowing this right now, but it's always better to know, is it not?

It is always good to know...Rules and case books are giant puzzle. They can be memorized but we still have to know how they fit with each other...a never ending process...

The boundary line is sometimes a plane that extends upwards. The three-point line is not, and does not, so I don't agree with your conclusion above.

Let's Go To The Videotape ...
 

5-2-1: A successful try, tap or thrown ball from the field by a player who
is located behind the team's own 19-foot, 9-inch arc counts three points. A ball
that touches the floor, a teammate inside the arc, an official, or any other goal
from the field counts two points for the team into whose basket the ball is thrown.

I'm trying to understand some posts. Some of you are saying that if the shooter touches the rim before releasing the ball, you consider him to be shooting from within the three point arc, and thus, it's only two points.

And, if the shooter touches the rim after releasing the ball, you consider him to be shooting from outside the three point arc, and thus, it's three points.

https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.M97...=0&w=300&h=300

Headache ???
 

If a player, while holding the ball, jumps and hits his head (not the ball) (unintentionally, no advantage gained) on a basket support, is said player out of bounds?

No. Reference the rules on player location. :)

I looked at the definitions (NFHS) of shooting and dunking. Shooting appears to involve throwing/tapping while dunking appears to involve forcing through the basket. By definition, dunking does NOT have to involve rim contact. The video of Griffin "dunking" appears to involve no rim contact with his hand. That NBA goal would be defined by the NFHS as a dunk. Billy Mac's 5-2-1 reference indicates that a "try" behind the 3-point line would count as 3 points. So, IMO, if someone jumped from behind the 3-point line and forcefully scored (dunked) a goal while touching the rim, it would count as 3 points. If the same situation occurred without touching the rim (still dunking by definition), it would count as 3 points.

Hypotheticals....gotta luv 'em.