New '16/17 Casebook Arrived

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Just came yesterday. A line-by-line comparison of this year's casebook and last season's:


Old 9.12B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: The ball became dead immediately when A2 moved into the lane prematurely. Therefore, the goaltending is ignored. The lane violation cancels the free throw and Team B will throw-in from a designated spot outside the end line. (9-1 Penalty 1)

New 9.12B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: No points can be scored A2's actions are ruled a violation. B will be given the ball for a throw-in on the sideline at the free-throw line extended. (9-1 Penalty 1)

This doesn't say A2 entered the lane prior to shot being released. So why is it a violation? It would be a goaltending wouldn't it?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by OKREF

This doesn't say A2 entered the lane prior to shot being released. So why is it a violation? It would be a goaltending wouldn't it?

The Casebook said that A2 committed "a" Violation, and in this instance the Violation was Offensive Goaltending.

MTD, Sr.

[RefBob]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The Casebook said that A2 committed "a" Violation, and in this instance the Violation was Offensive Goaltending.

MTD, Sr.

Old 9.12B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: The ball became dead immediately when A2 moved into the lane prematurely. Therefore, the goaltending is ignored. The lane violation cancels the free throw and Team B will throw-in from a designated spot outside the end line. (9-1 Penalty 1)

New 9.12B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: No points can be scored A2's actions are ruled a violation. B will be given the ball for a throw-in on the sideline at the free-throw line extended. (9-1 Penalty 1)

I'm somwhat confused here. If new 9.12B is referring to to a goaltending violation by A2, why doesn't B get two free throws and the ball for a division line throw-in under 10-3-9, Penalty?

Camron Rust also raises some interesting questions about why new 9.12B calls for a side line throw-in at the free throw lane line extended. As Camron noted, this seems to be contradicted by Rule 9-1, Penalty 1.a.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by OKREF

This doesn't say A2 entered the lane prior to shot being released. So why is it a violation? It would be a goaltending wouldn't it?

I think the old case was a left over from when players had to wait until the ball hit to enter the lane. It should have been updated when entry was changed to the release but it was missed.

They changed that, but they also changed the throwin spot for the infraction at the same time.

[WhistlesAndStripes]

Originally Posted by Freddy

SNIP

UNANNOUNCED CHANGES:

2.2.4A (Added the underlined words to last year's citation): The score is Team A-62 and Team b-61 when the horn sounds to end the fourth quarter. Prior to the referee's approval of the final score, the coach of Team A directs obscene gestures at the officials. RULING: A technical foul is charged for unsporting behavior and the result of the free throws will determine which team wins or whether an extra period is required.

3.3.2A Grammatical revision: changed the words "...the number for each team member is 'erroneously indicated'" to "the number for each team member is 'incorrect'".

Old 3.5.7A, dealing with compression shorts, cut-off jeans, jewelry, and leg compression sleeves omitted, and old 3.5.7B, dealing with tights or skirt for religious reasons, were omitted . . . in favor of:

New 3.5.7 SITUATION: Substitute A6 is beckoned and enters the court to replace A1. A6 is wearing: (a) a bracelet, (b) an earring covered with tape or (c) earhole spacer. RULING: The items in (a), (b) and (c) are illegal and considered jewelry and A6 will not be allowed to participate while wearing the items. No penalty is involved. A6 simply cannot participate until the illegal items are removed.

Old 9.12B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: The ball became dead immediately when A2 moved into the lane prematurely. Therefore, the goaltending is ignored. The lane violation cancels the free throw and Team B will throw-in from a designated spot outside the end line. (9-1 Penalty 1)

New 9.12B: On the second of two free-throw attempts by A1, the ball is touched outside the cylinder by A2. RULING: No points can be scored A2's actions are ruled a violation. B will be given the ball for a throw-in on the sideline at the free-throw line extended. (9-1 Penalty 1)

Old 10.1.9 stated in the RULING: A technical foul is immediately charged to Team B for failing to have all players return to the court at approximately the same time following a time-out or intermission . . .

Same situation's ruling this year, renumbered as 10.2.5, removes the words "at approximately the same time".


That's all I could find. Anything else worthy of note you uncover, I'd appreciate hearing from you on it.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So we're going with the NBA mechanic here?

Here's what I love about this board. I'm kind of a rules guru, but I must admit I've NEVER sat down and compared PY books LINE BY LINE to look for any unannounced changes like this.

Our associations first meeting of the season will be in about 3 weeks. The powers that be will of course go through the rule changes and points of emphasis as they always do at the first meeting. When they open it up, things like this that I glean from this board make me look even smarter than I already am.

THANKS EVERYONE!!

[Texas Aggie]

Like we did thirty-five years ago?

It was actually 28!

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I think the old case was a left over from when players had to wait until the ball hit to enter the lane. It should have been updated when entry was changed to the release but it was missed.
They changed that, but they also changed the throwin spot for the infraction at the same time.

So, what do we teach? Are we assuming this sideline throw-in spot in new 9.12B is erroneous, thus not to be regarded? Will a further "Interpretation" correct the error, or shall we teach that 9.12B is correct?
I'm ignoring it until further official word.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Freddy

So, what do we teach? Are we assuming this sideline throw-in spot in new 9.12B is erroneous, thus not to be regarded? Will a further "Interpretation" correct the error, or shall we teach that 9.12B is correct?
I'm ignoring it until further official word.

With so many elements (rules and other cases) still declaring the throwin spot to be as it has always been, this can only be an error that should be corrected.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Freddy

So, what do we teach? Are we assuming this sideline throw-in spot in new 9.12B is erroneous, thus not to be regarded? Will a further "Interpretation" correct the error, or shall we teach that 9.12B is correct?
I'm ignoring it until further official word.

I am hoping that when they release the annual interps in about a month that this will be corrected.

In fact, I am certain that I will see a correction, even if it's "written" in white ink on white paper (or, to be inclusive, black ink on black paper)