Out of Bounds Location

[packersowner]

Over the holidays, I had a partner who refused to administer a spot throw where the ball went out of bounds. Instead this individual, would often bounce the ball across the lane on baseline throw ins. On more than 1 occasion, this left myself and our 3rd out of position. Below is an excerpt from a recent IAABO newsletter, which seems like perfect timing. I normally address this as the R in pre-game, but in this case I was U2 and our pre-game was cut short. Afterwards, I asked the individual about bouncing across the lane and they said they are fine doing that and many college instructors are okay with this to speed up play. That doesn't sound right to me, but I always appreciate hearing from others. Thoughts? Is anyone else hearing this from instructors?

Officials should also guard against the urge to determine the throw-in spot based on the location of the officials. This frequently occurs when the ball is knocked out of bounds on the endline across the lane. In this case, the lead needs to administer the throw-in across the lane which will require his/her partner(s) to move across the court. Often times you will see the administering official put the ball in an incorrect location so the partners will not have to move. On other occasions, there are throw-ins placed on the sideline, when by rule it should be on the endline. We need to remind ourselves what impact this type of decision has on both teams. Many teams have designed inbounds plays, and if we put the ball in an incorrect location, we do impact the effectiveness of both the offense and defense on the ensuing throw-in.

[bob jenkins]

NCAAW bounces across on end-line going long. It's not the FED mechanic, but it should be.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

NCAAW bounces across on end-line going long. It's not the FED mechanic, but it should be.

I think NCAAM went to it this year, too. Can an NCAAM official confirm or deny?

Yes, it should be the NFHS mechanic.

(If not going long, then they shouldn't be bouncing anyway.)

[crosscountry55]

In NCAAW (and maybe NCAAM and hopefully NFHS one day), what do you do when going long with backcourt pressure? Still bounce across? Because that's a time you would not currently bounce (at all much less across) in NFHS mechanics.

NCAA-M you have the option of bouncing across the lane with no pressure in the backcourt. If there is pressure you should go across to administer.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

In NCAAW (and maybe NCAAM and hopefully NFHS one day), what do you do when going long with backcourt pressure? Still bounce across? Because that's a time you would not currently bounce (at all much less across) in NFHS mechanics.

Still bounce in NCAAW

[JRutledge]

I like the NF mechanic the way it is. I also am not aware of a change for the NCAAM to change the mechanic either. It looks lazy to me to bounce the ball across the lane.

Peace

[zm1283]

We follow NFHS mechanics pretty closely, but here we are allowed to bounce across the lane in the backcourt. It helps save steps, especially in 2-person mechanics.

As far as the OP, it is a laziness issue.

[Remington]

From the Men's CCA Mechanics Manual:

T in-bounds ball on end-line. T is between the ball and the sideline on the table-side. If there is no defensive pressure, the T has the option of bouncing the ball to the player in-bounding the ball across the free-throw lane (indicated by location 2). This will minimize unnecessary movement by the new C and new L.

[packersowner]

This is helpful. Where this hurts rotation is when the C calls a foul opposite table-side with change of possession. If you're new T doesn't rotate, it causes the C to have report and go back (which is incorrect) or run to be the new L. This also potentially puts all 3 officials on the same side of the court for a period of time. I'd prefer to have the T flex opposite table side for the throw in, leave the C at the table and allow your new L to be opposite table side as well.

In college this probably doesn't matter as much because the C would report and remain the C, so no matter what your T and L can hold. Is this correct?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by packersowner

This is helpful. Where this hurts rotation is when the C calls a foul opposite table-side with change of possession. If you're new T doesn't rotate, it causes the C to have report and go back (which is incorrect) or run to be the new L. This also potentially puts all 3 officials on the same side of the court for a period of time. I'd prefer to have the T flex opposite table side for the throw in, leave the C at the table and allow your new L to be opposite table side as well.

In college this probably doesn't matter as much because the C would report and remain the C, so no matter what your T and L can hold. Is this correct?

On the men's side The Calling official always ends up opposite the table.

Sent from my SM-N920P using Tapatalk

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by packersowner

This is helpful. Where this hurts rotation is when the C calls a foul opposite table-side with change of possession. If you're new T doesn't rotate, it causes the C to have report and go back (which is incorrect) or run to be the new L. This also potentially puts all 3 officials on the same side of the court for a period of time. I'd prefer to have the T flex opposite table side for the throw in, leave the C at the table and allow your new L to be opposite table side as well.

In college this probably doesn't matter as much because the C would report and remain the C, so no matter what your T and L can hold. Is this correct?

You are incorrect on NFHS mechanics. If C or T opposite calls a foul going the other way with no free throws, that official does not go tableside. You report the foul and slide down the court. It’s not a switching situation, though many times the calling official wants to go all the way up to the table to report, so at that point many officials will just go ahead and switch. But according to the manual, your understanding of the proper switch is incorrect.

[Rich]

Exactly. There is only one long switch and that's when the lead calls a change of possesion foul. Period.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[sdoebler]

This will differ per state as the NFHS book says that officials go table side after a foul call, however IABBO states go opposite table in high school.

[JRutledge]

This is a minor issue. Some states do things differently as it relates to long switches. I have no idea honestly what the NF mechanic is because we have a hard fast rule in the IHSA. Any time the lead calls a foul, and we are going from BC to FC after the ball is in play, then the lead comes off the end line and goes tableside on a switch. If the Trail makes the call and we are going from BC to FC, we go back to still be the Trail.

Even if the NF has a mechanic, it sounds like many other things there are philosophies to do it a certain way regardless of what is in that book. IJS.

Peace