random situations
 

Player A1 dribbles into the lane and jumps for a try. Player B2 jumps to block the shot. Player A2 is between B2 and the basket facing the basket, Player A1 realizes his shot is going to be blocked throws the ball at A2s back. The ball hits A2s back and bonces back to A1 while his is still in the air and he catches the ball. A1 lands dribbles to the basket and scores. Legal Play? Basically the bonce off A2s back is considered a pass and a pass back?


So this next situation actually also happened in a camp and the D1 clinician wasn't sure of the rule. Would like the NCAA rule and high school rule if possible.

A1 has the ball out of bounds near the basket for a front court spot throw in. A1 passes the ball in bounds and then stays in his spot out bounds. A good 10-15 seconds pass while team A is still in control in the front court and A1 is still at the point of the throw in standing out of bounds. Is he required to return to the court at the conclusion of the throw in at any time period?

Thanks

Someone will cite the applicable rule, but that is a technical in the NCAA-Men's and NFHS rule sets; Class B in NCAA-Men's.

Section 4. CLASS B TECHNICAL INFRACTIONS
Art. 1.
k. Purposely delaying his return to the playing court after being legally out
of bounds;

Ah that's NCAA, thanks still working on finding NFHS

NFHS

SECTION 3 PLAYER TECHNICAL
A player shall not:

ART. 2 . . . Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.

Also NCAAW:

Art. 3. Player/Substitute Technical Fouls
j. Purposely delaying her return to the playing court after being legally out
of bounds.

Note that in practice, it's going to need to be a *really* long time and not just a momentary hesitation. I've never seen it called.

Your first play is legal.

It's A Pass ...
 

Always listen to bob.

9-5: 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.

4-44: Traveling is moving a foot or feet in any direction in excess of prescribed limits
while holding the ball. The limits on foot movements are as follows:
ART. 3 After coming to a stop and establishing a pivot foot:
a. The pivot foot may be lifted, but not returned to the floor, before the ball is
released on a pass or try for goal.
b. If the player jumps, neither foot may be returned to the floor before the ball
is released on a pass or try for goal.
c. The pivot foot may not be lifted before the ball is released, to start a dribble.
ART. 4 After coming to a stop when neither foot can be a pivot:
a. One or both feet may be lifted, but may not be returned to the floor before
the ball is released on a pass or try for goal.
b. Neither foot may be lifted before the ball is released, to start a dribble.

We Need Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. ...
 

Going back forty years, has this ever been a NFHS violation rather than a technical foul?

(Officiate long enough and it's not the rules that are confusing, it's the rule changes that are confusing.)

Right, I wasn't on the game but it was a solid 10-15 seconds which seems like forever when you are looking at the kid. Additionally, the situation could most likely be prevented by the official telling the kid "Get on the court"

Confused In Connecticut ...
 

Wait? Maybe it was this: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason, that used to be a technical foul that is now a violation?

I'm so confused. Where's Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. when you need him?

1. Legal play. Players jump into the air and throw a pass all the time. One or two of them are bound to get deflected back to the original player.
2. Really? A D1 clinician doesn't know that rule?!?! You should get a refund of your camp fee due to instructor incompetence.

It's not the official's job to instruct the player. That is not preventative officiating. This player has already committed an infraction. The official should simply make the call.

That shouldn't happen, but if he does, this is a technical foul for leaving the court for an unauthorized reason. This would be the same in NCAA, because "out of bounds by his own volition" specifically refers to a situation where such out-of-bounds player comes back in to receive the ball. Even if there is no specific rule against staying out of bounds at other levels, I would use the "leaving the court for an unauthorized reason" rule to penalize the player. It would be surprising if a coach doesn't notice that his player stayed out of bounds, but this is a situation where being stupid is a crime (laughter).

Technical Foul Or Violation ...
 

Be careful here. According to NFHS rules, "Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds", is not the same as "leave the court for an unauthorized reason". The former is a technical foul, usually (but not always) associated with a throwin situation, the latter is a violation usually associated with situations involving play action (using a screen by running out of bounds).

Being OOB to be the inbounder isn't an authorized reason? Lah me.

I hope that you are referring to FIBA or NBA rules, with which I'm not familiar, because you are incorrect for both NFHS and NCAA. Those rule citations have already been posted in this thread.

I would have to disagree here, it is much better for the game to tell the kid to get on the court then to go through that violation and penalty administration.

Elbows to the Head are Merely Flow Interrupters
 

Since, in crafting your perception of a "better game", you're taking a "Cafeteria Approach" to which rules you are going to enforce and which you are going to ignore, please list them and leave the list in the locker room so that I know what I'm getting into when I'm doing the next game. :rolleyes:

Am I understanding this correctly?

Are you getting a coaching stipend on the side?

That approach would likely get you blocked as a partner by 95% of the quality officials on this forum.

What a hack..

You guys must not have worked games in a long time if you think that calling a T for not getting on the court fast enough is going to put you in a better place with your partners. You have it backwards on who would be blocked when you are constantly nit picking at the rule book when you have options to have better game flow.

List of rules we aren't going to follow, sorry how many times have you administered this rule?

Each and every time the situation presented itself.
That's called consistency, on both ends of the court and always in accordance with applicable rules.

Never, But I Came Close Twice ...
 

Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds?

I only had the opportunity once in almost four decades of officiating. It was a middle school game and the inbounder caught me off guard, I hadn't expected him to do delay as long as he did, so I didn't sound my whistle for a technical foul. I think that he was just watching the action, and was not being deceitful, nor did his team gain an advantage, in fact, just the opposite, his team was disadvantaged in a four against five situation. I noted the player's number and the next time we were both in the same situation I reminded him that it would be technical foul if he delayed as he a previously done. Of course he didn't know the rule. I did tell him that I would nail him with a technical the next time he did it. He didn't do it again.

Intent and purpose? Advantage and disadvantage? I lost no sleep over passing on the technical foul.

Leaving the court for an unauthorized reason?

Only observed it being called once in almost four decades. Boys varsity game. I'm the lead and an offensive player almost runs into me as he runs out of bounds after using a back door screen. I say to myself, "He can't do that, I'm going to nail him with a violation the next time they run that play". We eventually make our way down to the other end of the court, where a foul is called, so my partner and I switch. Several seconds later where back down the original end of the court, but now I'm the trail and my partner is the lead. The team runs the same play and my partner calls the violation, without any communication between us regarding the call. It was the first time he ever called it, that's how blatant it was. Of course it took a few minutes to explain it to the coach.

Example
 

Rule 10-4-2

I was there when this was called. The coach knew why the player T was issued. No problem having it called here.

1. Not sure why there are two people chopping the clock

2. That player was purposely or deceitfully delaying his return? Matter of judgement obviously

In the end you work for you assignor, I know that my assignors would not like a technical ruled in that situation. Every assignor is different and if that is what your assignor wants issued in that situation well done.

Zoned Out ...
 

Nice video Freddy. Thanks.

It's hard to read a player's mind, but I'm not 100% sure that the inbounder purposely or deceitfully delayed his return to the court. I just think that he zoned out for a few seconds. However the inbounding team did gain an advantage as the inbounder's defender never turned around and just stared at the inbounder. Had he turned around, he could have defended the shot. Bottom line, advantage gained, nice call.

That wasn't at all relevant to the discussion, but if this mechanic is in question . . .

:confused:

And with that you should stop talking and just read.

Agreed.

Obviously the 10-15 seconds of the OP is absurd and an EASY technical, but generally speaking, TONS of teams run inbounds plays on the endline where the inbounder purposely delays and then pops in to receive the return pass. We've all seen it 100s of times.

And as the administering official, you can see it coming a mile away. Your choices are:
1.) Call the rules-based T and then prepare to explain that rule to the coach/player, since fewer than 5 percent of them (and all of the fans … not relevant, but nonetheless) realize this is an illegal tactic.
2.) Say "Come right inbounds" (or something similar) to the inbounder once it's clear that's his plan. I do this all the time. It works 99 out of 100 times and prevents the mess. For the one kid who doesn't listen AND subsequently receives the inbounds pass, you call the T and are also armed with the fact you tried to save him when the coach prepares to rip your head off.

FWIW, I would have no T in the video posted. In my judgment, not purposeful or deceitful, and he never even became part of the play.

I'm with sdoebler on this one. Those who aren't must call a looootttttt of 3-seconds violations in their games.

So much over-statement that response is difficult to muster.

The play in this video is NOT a technical foul and an incorrect call. To all the officials reading this thread, for the love of God do not call this situation a technical foul.

Consensus ...
 

I can live with AremRed's interpretation. He'll get no argument from me.

:)

I assume they also start most lower level games they have ever worked with T's for not having a roster to the scorer in required time.

Agreed. At my camp I had a clinician tell me when I called a kicked ball, I need to think about what I am going to tell the coach before I make a call. :eek: Wasn't a D1 official but still. :mad:

Usually the next question is about passing off the backboard. Pass is defined as being between players. I recall the debate but not the outcome/citation. Maybe it was illegal by rule but never called???

A1 obviously throws the ball off the backboard to himself and then lays the ball in the basket. Legal?

Legal. Specific case plays in FED and NCAA.

Citation Please ...
 

Not interpreted as a try in the caseplay? Shooter takes an additional step after the airborne release in the caseplay? Off the player's own backboard that his team is shooting at in the caseplay?

I would love to see that NFHS caseplay.

4.15.4 SITUATION C: After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (c) against his/her own backboard in an attempt to score (try), catches the rebound and dribbles again. RULING: 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.

This (above) says it's a try. I want to see a caseplay where the release is "obviously" not a try, as in bucky's post.

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

This (above) says it legal to throw the ball off one's own backboard, but it doesn't say what's legal to do next. He can legally catch it since the ball touching one's own backboard in not considered part of a dribble, but what can he legally do after he catches it? Also, this caseplay doesn't indicate whether, or not, the player moves his pivot foot between the release and the catch.

https://www.facebook.com/22189113782...6733955009150/

https://youtu.be/uAskXXKV2GU

A few years ago somebody posted a video on the Forum of a college player (possibly a Duke player) driving down the lane, becoming airborne, seeing his shot will be blocked, deliberately throws the ball off the backboard, takes additional steps, catches the ball, passes (while airborne) to a teammate in the corner who hits a three. Nice video. I can't find it.

Wouldn't It Be Nice (The Beach Boys, 1966) ...
 

It would certainly be nice if the NFHS would define any ball thrown at the backboard, that touches the backboard, as a try, but, as far as I know, the NFHS hasn't done that yet.

So, aorn, we do not have a rule/case that indicates passing the ball to yourself off the backboard is legal. Anyone got something? If not, what is the violation?

Moving A Pivot Foot Outside The Prescribed Limits ...
 

Who says that we don't have a citation that says that it's legal, although a player, by definition, can't make a self pass.

4-31: A pass is movement of the ball caused by a player who throws, bats or rolls the
ball to another player.

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

4-15-1: A dribble is ball movement caused by a player in control who bats
(intentionally strikes the ball with the hand(s)) or pushes the ball to the floor one or several times. It is not a part of a dribble when the ball touches a player’s own
backboard.

So, in at least one specific case, not only can he legally throw it against his own backboard, but he also legally catch it after it bounces back.

We don't know, in 9.5 SITUATION, if said player moved his pivot foot (I'm assuming he didn't for this to be legal), or any foot, before the release. That would make a difference in regard to if he's actually allowed to legally catch it.

In these "throw the ball off the backboard and dunk plays", most likely moving a pivot foot outside the prescribed limits, in other words a travel violation.

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

Of course, it's not a pass, nor is it a shot.

All of this assumes that the official did not rule the throw off the backboard to be a try. If it was ruled a try, then the player can legally do just about anything.

The shooter can retrieve his or her own airball, if the official considers it to be a shot attempt. The release ends team control. It is not a violation for that player to start another dribble at that point.

Guess I need to be more specific. I will start a new topic.

I suggest you check your mechanics manual.

The purpose is so the table can see the clock being started. If the Lead makes a frontcourt throw-in from the endline, the table might not see the Lead's start-the-clock signal. This is why Trail mirrors the chop by Lead.

Conversely, if the teams are going backcourt to frontcourt, the new Trail is the only one who chops the clock, because the new Center has just finished administering substitutions (if there were any), and the new Lead has to get into his new position (Same for 2-person, minus the Center official).