Reference for Throwing Ball off Own Backboard
 

Can anyone reference a case play or interpretation or other ruling, directly from the NFHS, that spells out the legality of a player throwing the ball off his own backboard?

Current NFHS Case Book 9.5 Situation.

9.5. Backboard is players "own equipment."

Thanks, guys.

Equipment ...
 

Just like throwing it off one's own headband?

The term "own backboard" refers to the backboard and basket that you are defending, correct???


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

NFHS 4-5-1: "A team's own basket is the one into which its players try to throw or tap the ball." Accordingly, the team's "own backboard" would be that to which said basket is attached.
This is a valid question, because, as it has been noted here before, I think FIBA's terminology is reversed from this. Anybody who speaks FIBA available to verify that?

Depends on whether you are using FED/NCAA rules or FIBA rules.

Under Adam's question, it's the basket into which you (usually) attempt to throw the ball.

I got "own" and "opponent's" backboard backwards (at least in NFHS rules). Casebook play 4.15.4 C clears it up:


4.15.4 SITUATION C:

After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (a) against the opponent's backboard and catches the rebound; (b) against an *official, immediately recovers the ball and dribbles again; or (c) against his/her own backboard in an attempt to score (try), catches the rebound and dribbles again.

RULING: A1 has violated in both (a) and (b). Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard or an *official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. In (c), the action is legal. Once the ball is released on the try, there is no player or team control, therefore, A1 can recover the rebound and begin a dribble.

Is (c) legal because this is a try or because the player throws the ball against his own backboard?
:D

How did Billy get Freddy's password?

Anyway, my answer to the above question is "yes."

Can somebody give a situation where throwing the ball off your own backboard (per NFHS rules) is not a try for goal?

I'm actually asking... not trying to quiz anybody.

Throw-in. ;)

damn :(

An errant pass.

Okay, I should expand...

Throwing the ball off your own backboard and having a violation. Like if a player lobs the ball off their backboard, gets the rebound in the air and slams it (like we've seen in NBA slam dunk contests). Would you call that a violation?

Could be basket interference if the ball was in the cylinder.

but otherwise you're calling the lob off the backboard a try for goal, and allowing the dunk that follows?

We don't have to call it a try for goal. It's legal to throw the ball off one's own backboard.

It may or may not be a try in the judgment of the official, but it's legal. So, unless the lob off the backboard was a free throw :eek:, then I guess the dunk is allowed.

It is NOT a try unless you think they're trying to shoot it. It is just a throw off their own backboard. And such action is entirely legal. It isn't a pass. It isn't a dribble. It isn't a try. It does not, however, allow a new dribble if the player has ended the first dribble unless you rule it to be a try. The case mentioned above that rules that the subsequent dribble is legal is because the play setup declared the throw to have been a try.

*facepalm*

Sent from my SM-G925V using Tapatalk

Break-away situation. Player alone decides to show off. He tosses the ball off the backboard, then runs and jumps to grab the ball and dunk it.

The throwing of the ball off the backboard is clearly not an attempt to score, but it is legal because of Case play 9.5

I'm going to disagree with that part because of 9.5 Situation.

Let's Go To The Videotape ...
 

9.5 SITUATION: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he/she throws the ball against: (a) his/her own backboard; and catches the ball. RULING: Legal in (a); a team’s own backboard is considered part of that team’s “equipment” and may be used.

The caseplay states that, after ending a dribble, it's legal to throw the ball against one's own backboard, and it's also legal to catch it.

It doesn't say that it's legal to start a new dribble (unless the official deems the throw to be a try).

Why is equipment in quotes? Could the player use his leg sleeve to do the same thing? Leg sleeves are equipment.

Nothing in 9.5 indicates or implies that the player is granted a new dribble, just that trowing it off the board and catching (which is not a dribble) it is legal.

I don't see any thing that suggests the dribble rules are suspended.

We've had this discussion multiple times in the past -- with the same (non-) results.

I think NFHS changed that case play a number of years ago -- but it didn't help.

SSDD.

If 9.5 doesn't mean the slate is clear and he's free to do anything, then wouldn't the dunk play be traveling?

No.

Why not? He threw the ball, ran and caught it again.

Freddy:

NFHS, NCAA Men's/Women's, NBA/WNBA: A player attempts to score in his team's basket.

FIBA: A player attempts to score in his opponent's basket.

MTD, Sr.

He didn't move his pivot foot while holding the ball. He didn't start a dribble after lifting the pivot foot. He let the ball hit what is treated the same as the floor after throwing the ball into the air...except that it is expressly not considered a dribble.

What part of the travel rule was broken?

Needs Clarification ...
 

9.5 SITUATION: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he/she throws the ball against: (a) his/her own backboard; and catches the ball. RULING: Legal in (a); a team’s own backboard is considered part of that team’s “equipment” and may be used.

I just noticed that 9.5 SITUATION doesn't indicate whether, or not, the player in question moves his pivot foot while the ball is bouncing of his own backboard. It doesn't say that he can. It doesn't say that he can't.

This situation is way too open ended.

4-44-3: After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot the pivot foot may be lifted but not returned to the floor before the ball is released on a pass or try for goal .

Throwing the ball against the board in this case, according to you, apparently is neither of these.

4.44.3 C b: A1 throws the ball over the head of B1 and then takes several steps before catching it.
tr
Ruling: Since the ball did not touch the floor, the tossing and subsequent catch is illegal.

apples and oranges comparison

Agree, but this play is an apple, and everything else is an orange.

A player's own backboard has not ever and is not the same as a ball hitting the floor. The opponent's backboard, and only the opponent's, is considered same as hitting floor. 9. 5 is an expansion of offensive player's rights etc. When they say it is ok to throw the ball off their own backboard, run and catch it because it is a teams "own equipment" i view that the same as saying it is like throwing it off another player or like a try. The fact that the 9.5 play doesnt include A1 catching and then dribbling the ball doesnt affect my opinion. frankly, the rules dont support the "own equipment" language in the play so i wouldnt cite the play as evidence that a player cant dribble after catching it. That is reading too much into the play rules.

We wont agree but if im going to allow someone to end dribble throw the ball off backboard, run and get it... im going to allow him to dribble it again if he does.

First, you have a typo, you meant try of goal, not dribble in your quote.

Then you forgot this fundamental part of the travel rule:

If the player is not holding the ball when the feet are moved, the article you cite is not applicable nor are any of the other articles in the traveling section.

You might wish to check rule 4-4-5:

Then 4-15-1 that says the ball touching your own board is not a dribble but doesn't remove the fact that it otherwise considered the same as touching the floor.


Why the distinction? I think it is more historic than anything, perhaps hearkening back to the time when jump balls were held in the circle at each FT line (yes, they were once complete circles). A tapped jump ball hitting the backboard would have ended the jump ball restrictions. I can't think of any other reason it would matter aside from making it clear that it is still inbounds even though it is mounted on an OOB surface.

Down to 8 lives left, maybe down to 6 after that mess.... I was wrongly thinking you were saying throwin off own backboard was considered dribble if it wasnt a try and this play is what allows it not to be considered a dribble. Id still allow another dribble after catching it off own backboard.

I think it is likely the latter.

Illegal Dribble ...
 

Why would you allow it?

9-5: Illegal Dribble
A player shall not dribble a second time after his/her first dribble has ended, unless it is after he/she has lost control because of:
ART. 1 A try for field goal.
ART. 2 A touch by an opponent.
ART. 3 A pass or fumble which has then touched, or been touched by,
another player.

Was there a try for field goal?
Was there a touch by an opponent?
Was there a pass, or fumble, which was then touched by another player?

You're right about the typo. I corrected it, my apologies. As for the fundamental part of the rule, the case play cited is what it is, and apparently is an exception to that fundamental. You don't call this a travel?

Because i view the case play expansively. If you just look at the rules, the player shouldnt be able to throw the ball off his backboard, run to another spot and catch it if it isnt a try. Again, when they say it is a player's "own equipment" i choose to interpret that as being similar to another player or a try.

Start A New Dribble ...
 

The case play only states that, after ending a dribble, it's legal to throw the ball against one's own backboard, and it's also legal to catch it. It doesn't say that it's legal to start a new dribble. There is no exception listed for this maneuver in the Illegal Dribble rule.

If a coach politely says to me that this is an illegal dribble, I have no rulebook basis, nor do I have a specific casebook basis, to support my no call.

(Assuming you're talking about case wherein a player throws the ball over an opponents head and catches it without letting it hit the floor).

I do, only because the NFHS has made it clear that they view that as an unintended advantage. Rather than rewrite the rule to cover it, they cover it by spirit by way of a case play.

Likewise, the throwing off the backboard, is expressly allowed by case play. As I'm thinking about it and the reasons why, I'm considering changing my mind on whether the player would be allowed to dribble again. Essentially, throwing it off the backboard is, in most aspects, treated the same, in spirit, as throwing it off another player or a try.

Cite me Billy. I'll take the heat for it. I think i would treat it as if it were like a throw off another player. If there was a foul by offense while it was all happening id probably stay with team control since i knew it wasnt a try. I think throwing it off board gives a fresh start for the player. Im only saying that because the case play itself is so far out away form the rules that if they want to allow that im going to allow the dribble after the catch.

Agreed, and with that in mind, he can move to catch the throw off the board, and he can start a new dribble afterward. Neither is specifically allowed. So if one is illegal, it seems that the other would be illegal.

I would allow both.

Dean Wormer ...
 

Consider yourself cited. Double secret probation. It's the worst sanction that a Forum member can get. It doesn't get much worse that that. What's your penalty? I can't tell you. It's a secret. I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.

It's ok. Then I'd be down to 5 lives. Good to be a cat. Wish I wasn't such a big one however...

FIBA you defend your basket and attempt to score in your opponents basket.

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

Here is a play I had several years ago. Player A steals the ball and is going in for a dunk. He throws the ball off the backboard and attempts a tomahawk slam. But he is too far from the basket and lands with the ball. in hand. He goes back up and two hand slams the ball. I called a travel simply because I never saw that play before. But researching that play later, I believe that it was legal and I should have allowed the goal.