Would you make this call? Why or why not?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Eastshire

I'm not going to cut hairs too fine when there's no pressure, but 2+ feet of OOB rolling is a bit more than a hair. Sometimes you can't save players from stupid.

This is probably why I'd call it. If it gets released right on or near the line, I'm probably not going to see it well enough to call it. 2.5 feet, however, is quite a bit. It really depends on how close it is.

And I'm sorry, but a coach really doesn't get to go off on what is a correct call, regardless of philosophy.

Technically, there's no legal way to roll the ball out of a throw in.

[deecee]

I don't understand why one would not call this? If the ball is released by the thrower in and it contacts the OOB side of the court first this should be a violation. Advantage or not. The ball is either OOB or it isn't. Do you also not call back court violations if the defender isn't pressing the ball/player?

[Dad]

Originally Posted by deecee

I don't understand why one would not call this? If the ball is released by the thrower in and it contacts the OOB side of the court first this should be a violation. Advantage or not. The ball is either OOB or it isn't. Do you also not call back court violations if the defender isn't pressing the ball/player?

Do you call three seconds if a player has their toe in the key while their guard is dribbling two inches within the front court? Yes, the rules are there, but I was just curious what others thought about it. You made it clear in your first post what you thought. No reason to reiterate you don't agree with someone maybe passing on it.

I thought it was a good call, and one I may have missed like Jrut said happened in his case. I've never seen it before so why not see what other officials would've done.

I get it. You would've called it a violation.

[VaTerp]

I'm apparently in the minority here but I don't see myself calling this. The OP says the inbounder was about 30 inches behind the OOB line. Presuming he leans forward to roll the ball, it doesn't necessarily mean he rolled it the entire 2.5 feet.

I just don't see this as an advantage gained not intended by rule though I could be convinced otherwise.

Does anyone have citation for the specific casebook play?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

I'm apparently in the minority here but I don't see myself calling this. The OP says the inbounder was about 30 inches behind the OOB line. Presuming he leans forward to roll the ball, it doesn't necessarily mean he rolled it the entire 2.5 feet.

I was thinking about this, too. Like I said, if the ball is released close enough to the line that I don't notice it's exactly location in reference to the line, I'll probably not call it.

Then again, there really is no legal way to roll the ball. It's either going to start from OOB or the thrower will be touching the ball to the floor IB while holding it. Either is a violation.

Is it worth getting? Probably ought to check local listings to be sure, but for me it's not too different from 3 seconds. If the violation happens in the midst of defenders, I'm likely to be more particular about it. If it happens without defenders around, but is still pretty egregious, I'll probably get it.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Adam

If the violation happens in the midst of defenders, I'm likely to be more particular about it. If it happens without defenders around, but is still pretty egregious, I'll probably get it.

Rolling the ball from OOB likely would never happen if the defense was pressing. It would be too risky. It seems to only happen in my experience when the only people in the backcourt are the kid rolling the ball, the kid receiving it, and me. I am probably not calling this...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Smitty

Rolling the ball from OOB likely would never happen if the defense was pressing. It would be too risky. It seems to only happen in my experience when the only people in the backcourt are the kid rolling the ball, the kid receiving it, and me. I am probably not calling this...

You're right. I was thinking about this in context of the ball bouncing OOB on a throw-in pass, but forgot to make that distinction. But in reality, there is no legal way to roll it. It would need to bounce, even slightly, if it's done legally.

I still say rolling the ball is dumb. Bounce it so your point guard can dribble on the fly without having to bend over and pick the ball up.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

Then again, there really is no legal way to roll the ball. It's either going to start from OOB or the thrower will be touching the ball to the floor IB while holding it. Either is a violation.

I'm not picturing this the same way. I think it is possible to do both...roll it and not be touching it when the ball touches inbounds. The player just had to release it 1" off the floor. It may "bounce" a little, but I still consider that a roll because that it what it will be doing almost immediately.

[billyu2]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm not picturing this the same way. I think it is possible to do both...roll it and not be touching it when the ball touches inbounds. The player just had to release it 1" off the floor. It may "bounce" a little, but I still consider that a roll because that it what it will be doing almost immediately.

Same here, Cameron. I see this several times a season and the ball almost always starts with at least a bit of a bounce. The one time I did see the ball bounce/roll from OOB across the line into the court I passed on it because the team that did it was down 30 with less than a minute to go and I admired the player's effort to continue to compete even though she and her team had zero chance to win.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I'm not picturing this the same way. I think it is possible to do both...roll it and not be touching it when the ball touches inbounds. The player just had to release it 1" off the floor. It may "bounce" a little, but I still consider that a roll because that it what it will be doing almost immediately.

yeah, I was being a bit technical with that. The 1" off the floor is what we'll normally see.

It's still a dumb way to do it.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

I'm apparently in the minority here but I don't see myself calling this. The OP says the inbounder was about 30 inches behind the OOB line. Presuming he leans forward to roll the ball, it doesn't necessarily mean he rolled it the entire 2.5 feet.

I just don't see this as an advantage gained not intended by rule though I could be convinced otherwise.

Does anyone have citation for the specific casebook play?

9.2.5 Situation A

Originally Posted by SD Referee

I can't disagree with this. No advantage gained, so if somebody went without the violation, I don't see it as something to get fired up about.

Sorry to Adam. I did misunderstand his post. I should have quoted this one.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Sorry to Adam. I did misunderstand his post. I should have quoted this one.

I appreciate it, thanks.

[Pantherdreams]

We live in a time when every call we make can be videotaped from a variety of angles and people, then be edited, zoomed, etc as they see fit. This doesn't mean we change the way the game is officiated, but it does mean at any give nmoment a coach, AD, assignor, evaluator etc. Can end up with a look at something you called/didn't call and you are going to need to justify your decision to someone.

Some people are more comfortable justifying or debating. Others want to be as by the book as possible. The when in Rome strategy is also a good one to employ here.

In terms of the OP. If everyone is focused on the end result of play and it might have touched the end line then I'll probably pass for game management reasons. If as the OP implied it spent 20-30 inches movnig out of bounds you have to get this because someone else is and you are going to have a hard time defending that you didn't see it.

In regards to the "rolling" strategy as a whole. We used it a few times back when 'ghettoblasters' were our sound system at games. We specifically rolled it because the coach wanted the defense to come forward to try to touch it as it advnaced beside you up the floor. This way as they reached for the ball the really atheletic skilled player beside it (not me) would try to time their pickup and shot to that reach to garner a foul call on a 3. If defense played it smart then they could pick it up and go with a flat footed defender immediately in front of them.

[BryanV21]

I don't see the problem calling this violation (it IS the rule), however I don't see a problem ignoring it assuming it isn't obvious and doesn't give the violating team an unfair advantage.

It's like ignoring a three-second violation since the player was in the lane for 3.5 seconds.

Some see it as game management.

[wildcatter]

I would absolutely call it - if it was clear to me. On violations that tend to be rarer like that one, I'm inclined to be close to 100% sure a) saw it right and b) interpreted the rule correctly (if it's a weird play) before calling it. To be fair, an issue that comes up with this is like what JRut mentioned - sometimes my brain is still processing "WTF" and by the time it registers, it would be a really late whistle (had a weird BC violation similar to a video someone posted about a week ago where I ate my whistle). I chalk some of that up to (my lack of) experience.

Just curious - without going looking for them, I try to call every major violation that I see (e.g. traveling, double dribble, carry, even 10-second FT), and don't even think of advantage/disadvantage (as opposed to fouls). But someone brought it up earlier - are there violations that you sometimes let go?