Three Simple Plays, Answer With Citations ...
 

We'll? Just exactly who else in on your side?

Or just go back to basics:

I Apologize ...
 

I found it, and I apologize to JRutledge, but I have since changed my mind after coming up with this scenario:

NFHS Play 1: A1 has a throwin on the sideline. Lined up parallel to the sideline, within three feet of the sideline, are, in order, left to right, A2, B2, A3, B3, A4, and B4. A3, who got there first, happens to be directly in front of inbounder A1. Before the official puts the ball at the disposal of inbounder A1, B3 requests to move such that he is directly in front of inbounder A1. The official grants the request because "the defense of the throwin has the right to stand next to the thrower". Is the official correct?

I was not asking for your approval or anyone to be on my side.

But since you care.

7.6.5 SITUATION: Prior to a throw-in on the end line near A’s basket, A1, A2 and A3 line up shoulder-to-shoulder parallel to the line and: (a) within 3 feet of it; or (b) more than 3 feet from it. In both cases, Team B requests space between the Team A players. RULING: In (a), the request is granted and a Team B player may position between each of the Team A players. In (b), the request is denied.

Peace

Wrong Citation ...
 

This is only for the parallel line of players within three feet of the boundary situation (it doesn't cover the perpendicular line of players, or the single offensive player standing in front of the inbounder), and it doesn't say anything about who may stand in front of the inbounder. Not one word.

Try again.

Remember, this is what you are trying to defend: "The defense of the throwin has the right to stand next to the thrower".

NFHS Play 1: A1 has a throwin on the sideline. Lined up parallel to the sideline, within three feet of the sideline, are, in order, left to right, A2, B2, A3, B3, A4, and B4. A3, who got there first, happens to be directly in front of inbounder A1. Before the official puts the ball at the disposal of inbounder A1, B3 requests to move such that he is directly in front of inbounder A1. The official grants the request because "the defense of the throwin has the right to stand next to the thrower". Is the official correct?

So three feet is not next to the thrower? OK, thanks for letting me know.

I said next to the thrower, which is within 3 feet as the rule was quoted some time ago. But you have a bug up your behind as you do with other silly things (like what officials tell or do not tell players). But hey, keep up the good fight.

Peace

Let's Keep It Simple ...
 

7.6.5 SITUATION states "within 3 feet of it", meaning within three feet of the boundary line, not within three feet of the thrower.

The entire line of inbounds players are three feet away from the boundary. The thrower can be farther back from the boundary in some gyms. The distance is only important for a line of players from the same team lining up parallel to the boundary, within three feet of the boundary, during a throwin. (three feet defining when, and only when, this parallel rule kicks in).

Sometimes a defensive player may end up in front of the thrower, sometimes it may be an offensive player . If it happens to be an offensive player in front of the thrower, and the defensive player requests to move such that he is directly in front of thrower, there is absolutely no rule, casebook play, or interpretation, that states that "the defense of the throwin has the right to stand next to the thrower". Whomever legally gets there first, gets the spot in front to the thrower. There is no rule, casebook play, or interpretation, that allows an official to grant a defensive player's request to stand in front of the thrower in the case where said player legally gets there first.

Let's try a simpler situation, that doesn't involve distance, just position, i.e. "next to the thrower".

NFHS Play 3: A1 has a throwin on the sideline. A2, who got there first, happens to be directly in front of inbounder A1. Before the official puts the ball at the disposal of inbounder A1, B2 requests to move such that he is directly in front of inbounder A1. The official grants the request because "the defense of the throwin has the right to stand next to the thrower". Is the official correct?

Remember, this is what you are trying to defend: "The defense of the throwin has the right to stand next to the thrower".

Silly ...
 

Silly enough to get published in a basketball officiating magazine, reaching several thousand officials, and get an extra $100.00 in my wallet.

Not going to knock the hustle, but you do realize that everything published is not worth a crap right? Glad you got a point of view published, but many do not agree with everything here or in a magazine. We know how Referee Magazine articles are often received.

Peace

Agree ...
 

We can agree on that (which is why I had several Forum members help me edit the article, and no, I'm not sharing the publication fee with everybody).

Is this is in a case book? What's the answer? I think he's incorrect based on your rule citings, but i'd like to know for sure.

But, Thanks For Asking ...
 

I made up the three case plays mentioned toward the end of this thread so we could discuss three different scenarios regarding this "supposed" rule. I apologize if I confused anybody. I was not trying to be deceitful. I believe that the answers for the three situations that I described are no, no, and no.

I believe it's the third case where JRut disagrees with you, so i wanted to be clear what was correct. What say Bullet Bob Jenkins or VATerp or another highly-respected forum official?

I never commented on his situation. ;)

Peace

So between the pissing match here, I have to say that it came across as though Jeff was saying that the defender has the right to be in the spot closest to the thrower no matter what. He then cited one specific play in which that would be the case (which we can all agree on). Other than that, the defender does not have the right to that spot if there is already someone there is what I've gathered from this di** swinging contest.

I know. The "he" i meant, was the official in the case play, "Is the official correct?" I should have said I think he/she is incorrect.