Throw-In Situation

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BigCat

I think I could make an argument using ball location rules that it is a violation on A1 if anybody inbounds touches the ball while A1 holds it over plane.

Ex. Player A2 inbounds touches ball while A1 has it over plane. Ball location rule says ball is located where player in contact with it. here, A2 is inbounds. A1 is also in contact with it out of bounds. He has caused it to be out of bounds. Of course, the case play above tells us that is not the rule. When B grabs it, it's a held ball not violation on A.

I think we're left with the fact that when A2 touches the ball while A1 has it over the plane there's no violation because the throw in didn't end. Doesn't seem right but it's what we are left with imo without another case play.

This area is goofed up. The case play in rule 9 says it is a violation if A1 reaches out and touches another player on the court. Says that touching gives him inbounds status. We know if A1 is inbounds with the ball and touches another player who's out of bounds it does not make A1 out of bounds. Not sure why the opposite is true in the case play....


9.2.5B. See also 7.1.1 and 7.1.2 sit B

That ruling and case play explanation is just wrong. Several of us on here said so when it first came out as an interpretation. Too bad that it made it into the book and is still with us.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

That ruling and case play explanation is just wrong. Several of us on here said so when it first came out as an interpretation. Too bad that it made it into the book and is still with us.

Yeah, if I were the rule maker I'd say A1 violates if he holds ball over plane and anyone touches it. It isn't that hard for an inbounder to keep it from happening and there's some basis in ball/player location rules for it to be a violation. Saying touching an inbound player with a hand gives player inbound status just isn't right.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Yeah, if I were the rule maker I'd say A1 violates if he holds ball over plane and anyone touches it. It isn't that hard for an inbounder to keep it from happening and there's some basis in ball/player location rules for it to be a violation. Saying touching an inbound player with a hand gives player inbound status just isn't right.

Except that its legal for a defensive player to knock the ball out of the hands of the thrower if the ball is held across the plane.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

Except that its legal for a defensive player to knock the ball out of the hands of the thrower if the ball is held across the plane.

Yes, I know...What I have said is that if they were basing these plays on the ball location rules it would be a violation on the thrower in, A1, if anybody touched the ball while he was holding it over the plane. A1 is out of bounds. Not only legal for B to grab the ball or hit it but also it is a violation on A1.

I know that's not the rule, said so above and mentioned the rule 6 case play. It's a held ball when B grabs it, not a violation on A1. They are not basing these plays on ball location rules. They are using the throw in has not ended stuff...thx

[Adam]

This really isn't an exception, though, since if a ball is being touched by someone with IB and someone with OOB status, OOB trumps. So by ball location rules, the ball still has OOB status if B1 touches the ball when A1 reaches it across. What rule has A1 violated again?

I'm with Nevada, the "note" in the rules that says it's a violation on the thrower if he touches an inbounds player is stupid. Ball location is not affected if a dribbler makes contact with bench personnel or a sub with OOB status, why should this be any different?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Adam

Ball location is not affected if a dribbler makes contact with bench personnel or a sub with OOB status, why should this be any different?

Nothing to see here. Move along.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Huh? Maybe I'm not understanding, but if a dribbler touches a person who is OOB (bench personnel, sub, security guard), the dribbler is OOB.

If the dribbler touches an object (score table, bleacher) then the dribbler is not OOB.

Doh, I may have this backwards, and I'm at everyone's mercy until I get home tonight.

I thought touching objects gave the player OOB status and touching persons did not.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Huh? Maybe I'm not understanding, but if a dribbler touches a person who is OOB (bench personnel, sub, security guard), the dribbler is OOB.

If the dribbler touches an object (score table, bleacher) then the dribbler is not OOB.

Other way around. Touching a person out of bounds is ok. touching an object is OOB. 7-1