If it's not obvious it's a violation, why would you start a 5 second count?

I thought the original play was B1 taking the ball out of the net. Then passing the ball to B2 with no attempt to get out of bounds. When the ball comes out of the net and B has it I'll wait to start a count until he gets out of bounds. If he stands there under the net without trying to get out of bounds or flips it to someone else to take the throw in i'll likely start the count. If it is clear he isn't passing the ball for someone else to throw it in…they go up floor etc I will call the violation without getting to 5.

The video is nothing like what I was visualizing. I would not have started counting in it.

I think you mis-read his post (as I did the first time).

He IS saying if it's obvious he would call it immediately and not wait until 5-seconds.

If it's not obvious he would pass.

Yes. We don't have to wait til 5 and give him another chance to throw it in properly. As I said, after seeing the video, I wouldnt have even started a count.

The hands don't always type clearly what i'm thinking. Sometimes that's good….sometimes that's bad….

OK, I was confused by the original description of the play.

Basically B1 didn't get OOB to make a legal throw-in. That's a violation.