Throw-In Enters Opponents’ Basket
 

This almost happened tonight. Backcourt TI from sideline goes across the court and almost goes in the opponents’ basket. What if it had? Rule 9-2-7 says “the” basket, but otherwise doesn’t clarify. Kind of leads one to believe it implies only to one’s own basket.

Thinking that absent any other way to adjudicate this, it would have to be a TI violation regardless of which basket it occurs at. 9-2-7 probably should say “a” basket rather than “the.”

Any thoughts on this once in a lifetime occurrence?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Violation. Don't overthink it.

Ask Around ...
 

Yes. Let's see the video. Somebody's grandmother must have recorded it on their smart phone.

Opposing team's basket? I'm counting 2 points for the opposing team.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Intent And Purpose ...
 

Now that we have a difference of opinion, please allow me to overthink it.

Exact wording:

9-2-7: The thrown ball shall not enter the basket before it touches or
is touched by another player.

While there certainly can be a difference between "the basket" and "a basket", I'm not 100% sure that the NFHS meant there to be a difference here.

On the other hand, I'm not 100% sure that the NFHS didn't mean there to be a difference here.

We have to try to figure out the intent of the rule here. What did the NFHS intend?

Lets look at the next article:

9-2-8: The thrown ball shall not become lodged between the
backboard and ring or come to rest on the flange before it touches or is
touched by another player.

Does this mean that a throwin violation would be called at one backboard/ring/flange and that a held ball would be called at the other backboard/ring/flange ?

Again, we have to try to figure out the intent of the rule here. What did the NFHS intend?

Had the NFHS replaced "the" with "their" it would have made the intent much easier to interpret.

For those that lean toward the original post counting, would you allow a offensive or defensive player to grab or swipe the ball on the way down, above the rim, chance to go in, outside of the cylinder?

It's not a try, you would have to ignore the grab or swipe.

(Note to young'uns, regardless of the intent, one would always call basket interference here, at either basket, by either team.)

I'm not ready to throw my dog into this fight, I'd like some other opinions first.

Sometimes the NFHS thinks that we're all mind readers.

https://tse4.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.q...=0&w=300&h=300

Violation. I don't see a reason why it should be a violation for one basket and not the other.

It’s a violation.5-1-1. “A goal is made when a live ball enters THE basket from above and remains in or passes through. No goal is scored if an untouched throw in goes through THE basket.”
The “THE” in these are referring to the basket the ball goes in. It is not used to limit it to the thrower’s basket.

Agree...violation.

Agreed, violation.

No points should be scored. This is different than causing the ball to enter the opponents basket, which is a specific act covered in the rulebook.

Definite Article ...
 

Sounds like a plausible explanation. Agree. Violation.

Even though "the" is a definite article (whereas "a" is an indefinite article), "the" does lack a certain degree of specificity here that would make me uncomfortable ruling otherwise.

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-XQxafboiS...r%2BPolice.jpg

:eek: