Running out of bounds and returning

OfficialBFish

Louisville vs NC, player sets screen along the baseline, another player comes off that screen while running out of bounds. He then clearly establishes both feet in bounds and then caught a pass. Referee blows whistle, points at baseline, and they give the ball to the defending team. Missed call?

Nevadaref

OfficialBFish wrote
Louisville vs NC, player sets screen along the baseline, another player comes off that screen while running out of bounds. He then clearly establishes both feet in bounds and then caught a pass. Referee blows whistle, points at baseline, and they give the ball to the defending team. Missed call?

Correct call. NCAA rule against doing exactly that. Leaving the court and being the first to touch the ball upon returning.

OfficialBFish

Nevadaref wrote
Correct call. NCAA rule against doing exactly that. Leaving the court and being the first to touch the ball upon returning.

Didn't know NCAA interpretation. Thanks

deecee

OfficialBFish wrote
Didn't know NCAA interpretation. Thanks

It's also a violation in HS.

Rich

deecee wrote
It's also a violation in HS.

In HS the violation is for leaving, not touching the ball first after returning.

deecee

Rich wrote
In HS the violation is for leaving, not touching the ball first after returning.

Yes, I made an assumption that the OP didn't know that either from his post.

OfficialBFish

Rich wrote
In HS the violation is for leaving, not touching the ball first after returning.

So if the same situation happened in high school, what would be the ruling?

JRutledge

Do you have the time of the play in the game?

Peace

Nevadaref

OfficialBFish wrote
So if the same situation happened in high school, what would be the ruling?

The violation would be whistled when the player steps out of bounds to go around the screen. The official wouldn't wait until he touched the ball after returning.

JRutledge wrote
Do you have the time of the play in the game?

About 2:30 remaining in the second half.

JRutledge

Nevadaref wrote
About 2:30 remaining in the second half.

Peace

[deleted]

Why the heck did Eades go opposite? I checked my NCAA-M manual and didn't see anything about going opposite on this or any other type of violation. He didn't call a technical according to the box score.

Nevadaref

AremRed wrote
Why the heck did Eades go opposite? I checked my NCAA-M manual and didn't see anything about going opposite on this or any other type of violation. He didn't call a technical according to the box score.

I found that confusing too. It made me think that he whistled for an illegal screen, but no foul was ever reported.

The crew was: Bryan Kersey, Mike Eades, Bill Covington Jr.

JRutledge

He probably was going to tell the coach about the violation and he kept going when the player started asking about the play. I would not have done that, but maybe his partner took his place and he just kept going.

Peace

Nevadaref

The best that I can surmise is that his partner thought the call was an illegal screen (team control foul) and came to take his place so he went opposite.

JRutledge

OfficialBFish wrote
Does it make any difference that he was the inbounder and never fully seemed to step in bounds after the throw in?

IMO, the thrower clearly steps from out of bounds and is right foot appears to be completely in-bounds and the left foot is in the air for a moment, then he goes out of bounds.

If he had never left the court, then this would be a Class B Technical Foul under Rule 10-4-1k. I think that is not what happened in this case.

Peace

frezer11

OfficialBFish wrote
Does it make any difference that he was the inbounder and never fully seemed to step in bounds after the throw in?

No, his motion off the screen took him further OOB, it was used to his advantage.

Have had a similar discussion before with others, if A2 runs OOB and then comes back in, and AFTER he is back in bounds and established, A1 throws the pass is that a violation? Rule says, " A player who has stepped out of bounds under his own volition and then becomes the first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court has committed a violation." If the ball is still in A1's hand, then A1 is the first to touch the ball by virtue of the fact that it's still in his hand. So is this a legal play? By the letter of the rule, I think yes, but by the spirit of the rule, I'd say no.

jpgc99

frezer11 wrote
No, his motion off the screen took him further OOB, it was used to his advantage.

Have had a similar discussion before with others, if A2 runs OOB and then comes back in, and AFTER he is back in bounds and established, A1 throws the pass is that a violation? Rule says, " A player who has stepped out of bounds under his own volition and then becomes the first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court has committed a violation." If the ball is still in A1's hand, then A1 is the first to touch the ball by virtue of the fact that it's still in his hand. So is this a legal play? By the letter of the rule, I think yes, but by the spirit of the rule, I'd say no.

The wording of this question isn't very clear to me, but it is a violation if the player that steps out of bounds is the next player (in sequential order) to touch the ball.

In other words, if A1 is holding the ball in bounds and A2 steps out of bounds on his own and returns to the court, someone else must touch the ball before A2. So A1 can pass to A3 and then to A2, but if the pass goes from A1 to A2 it is a violation.

JetMetFan

OfficialBFish wrote
Does it make any difference that he was the inbounder and never fully seemed to step in bounds after the throw in?

Well, if that was the case the player could have received a technical for purposely delaying his return to the playing court after being legally out
of bounds. Given the two choices on the menu, I think the player and his coach would opt for the violation.

frezer11

jpgc99 wrote
The wording of this question isn't very clear to me, but it is a violation if the player that steps out of bounds is the next player (in sequential order) to touch the ball.

In other words, if A1 is holding the ball in bounds and A2 steps out of bounds on his own and returns to the court, someone else must touch the ball before A2. So A1 can pass to A3 and then to A2, but if the pass goes from A1 to A2 it is a violation.

And I agree with your interpretation, but I think the wording of the rule creates some doubt in that if A2 returns to the court before A1 releases the pass, then technically A1 is the first to touch the ball after A2's return

Raymond

frezer11 wrote
And I agree with your interpretation, but I think the wording of the rule creates some doubt in that if A2 returns to the court before A1 releases the pass, then technically A1 is the first to touch the ball after A2's return

It doesn't create doubt among college officials. They understand what the rule is telling them to do.