Would you make this call? Why or why not?

[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.

[Smitty]

Originally Posted by Adam

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.

I never really thought about it being illegal till you brought it up - it's just so commonly done...as someone has said before (maybe you) - I don't want to be a pioneer...

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Smitty

I never really thought about it being illegal till you brought it up - it's just so commonly done...as someone has said before (maybe you) - I don't want to be a pioneer...

I didn't word it that way (maybe bob or Rich), but it's true. I apply it to even off the court stuff. There are areas where officials should strive to stand out: presence, accuracy, promptness, appearance, etc. There are also areas where we don't want to stand out.

Reality is, none of us should be watching this play all that closely in the absence of pressure, so it's going to have to be pretty obvious before I even notice it. We're looking ahead to the matchup, we're glancing at the clock/score.

[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.

[VaTerp]

Originally Posted by Gutierrez7

. If an official does not put a whistle on the play, then that official has just favored one team over another.

I think this is a rather ridiculous statement to make. An official, like me, who is unlikely to have a whistle on this play isnt going to have it for either team so its definitely not favoring one team over another.

Originally Posted by wildcatter

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?

One of the two main people who trained me, who assigns HS and some college ball, consistently said "don't make violations your best call." Not saying you are doing that at all here but his point was that while you should get all of the obvious violations, your focus should be on having high accuracy with fouls and judgement on contact situations.

For me, there is some advantage/disadvantage and game management consideration to some violations. I'm passing on some carrying violations, non-obvious travels that occur 60 plus feet away from the basket and with no defender present.

As Adam said, check your local listings. My current assigner for most of the HS games I work supports this "philosophy" and believes this is a common sense approach to officiating.

I realize that many will disagree.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

9.2.5 Situation A

Thanks. This refers to the defensive pressure consideration.

I'm inquiring about the language on the case play that the OP referenced about the throw-in bouncing out of bound first on a pass.

[wildcatter]

Originally Posted by VaTerp

One of the two main people who trained me, who assigns HS and some college ball, consistently said "don't make violations your best call." Not saying you are doing that at all here but his point was that while you should get all of the obvious violations, your focus should be on having high accuracy with fouls and judgement on contact situations.

For me, there is some advantage/disadvantage and game management consideration to some violations. I'm passing on some carrying violations, non-obvious travels that occur 60 plus feet away from the basket and with no defender present.

As Adam said, check your local listings. My current assigner for most of the HS games I work supports this "philosophy" and believes this is a common sense approach to officiating.

I realize that many will disagree.

Thanks VaTerp. I'm with you on the principle that it's important to get all of the obvious violations. I also want to make sure any violation I call is one I'm very sure of.

So it's an erring-on-the-side-of-slooooow, measured count to 10 on FTs (I've only called one of those, 9-10 years ago when I was in college reffing intramurals). But also, if it's more common violation like a travel or BC, I want to make sure I saw it.

It's a different philosophy than with fouls, particularly on clear PCs/blocks with significant contact. Hopefully I got a great look and know the call is right, but even if I'm not 100%, I'm blowing my whistle to call what I think is best based off what I saw.

The point is, advantage/disadvantage is inherently subjective, and it makes sense that fouls are where you want to focus like the big dog who trained you said.

And this is not really disagreeing with you, but I don't really see passing on a violation as part of game management, like I would on borderline fouls. I call any violation I'm sure I saw, no matter where it is or what the score is. I don't feel like it's in my power to ignore a rule violation. If I see a 3 second call (and I'm sure it's 3+ seconds), I call it (game flow can go both ways). Where trouble starts occurring is when my partner doesn't call it. I know consistency is critical, and it just drives me nuts because the easiest thing from a consistency perspective is to go by one set of policies/rules... the rulebook. But I get it 100% that local listings may vary and I should shut up about it because I am not a big dog. I just moved to a new state anyway, so maybe that philosophy is something I will have to unlearn.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by wildcatter

Thanks VaTerp. I'm with you on the principle that it's important to get all of the obvious violations. I also want to make sure any violation I call is one I'm very sure of.

So it's an erring-on-the-side-of-slooooow, measured count to 10 on FTs (I've only called one of those, 9-10 years ago when I was in college reffing intramurals). But also, if it's more common violation like a travel or BC, I want to make sure I saw it.

It's a different philosophy than with fouls, particularly on clear PCs/blocks with significant contact. Hopefully I got a great look and know the call is right, but even if I'm not 100%, I'm blowing my whistle to call what I think is best based off what I saw.

The point is, advantage/disadvantage is inherently subjective, and it makes sense that fouls are where you want to focus like the big dog who trained you said.

And this is not really disagreeing with you, but I don't really see passing on a violation as part of game management, like I would on borderline fouls. I call any violation I'm sure I saw, no matter where it is or what the score is. I don't feel like it's in my power to ignore a rule violation. If I see a 3 second call (and I'm sure it's 3+ seconds), I call it (game flow can go both ways). Where trouble starts occurring is when my partner doesn't call it. I know consistency is critical, and it just drives me nuts because the easiest thing from a consistency perspective is to go by one set of policies/rules... the rulebook. But I get it 100% that local listings may vary and I should shut up about it because I am not a big dog. I just moved to a new state anyway, so maybe that philosophy is something I will have to unlearn.

I don't advise newer officials to try passing on violations for game management. It's a rather advanced approach. As Nevada pointed out, the NFHS frowns on it. But as anyone will tell you, in some areas it's just expected as a skill to develop. My advice, unless you're getting evaluators ask you if you really needed to make that travel call, keep doing what you're doing.