Failure to legally inbound ball after made goal

[chet_hoyt]

Ran into this scenario and wasn't sure I called it correctly...
A1 scored. B1 grabbed ball and walked to the endline to inbound, but in doing so was never actually completely out of bounds. His foot was clearly on the endline as he passed to B2, who walked the ball up the floor. I continued the 5 second count, thinking that they still could correct the error if they legally inbounded the ball within the 5 seconds. They didn't realize their error and were called for a 5-second inbound violation. Was this the correct call?

Thanks.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by chet_hoyt

Ran into this scenario and wasn't sure I called it correctly...
A1 scored. B1 grabbed ball and walked to the endline to inbound, but in doing so was never actually completely out of bounds. His foot was clearly on the endline as he passed to B2, who walked the ball up the floor. I continued the 5 second count, thinking that they still could correct the error if they legally inbounded the ball within the 5 seconds. They didn't realize their error and were called for a 5-second inbound violation. Was this the correct call?

Thanks.

Immediate violation. 9.2.2C

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by chet_hoyt

Ran into this scenario and wasn't sure I called it correctly...
A1 scored. B1 grabbed ball and walked to the endline to inbound, but in doing so was never actually completely out of bounds. His foot was clearly on the endline as he passed to B2, who walked the ball up the floor...
Thanks.

As described, B1 legally threw-in the ball.

(Billy, this is where one of your "clarifying" posts would actually further the discussion )

[LRZ]

"On the endline" is ok; over the endline is an immediate violation, as bob said.

Rule 4-9-2: "The inside edges of these [boundary] lines define the inbounds and out-of bounds areas."

[frezer11]

The way I'm reading your description, he was never fully OOB, so say his right foot was half IB, half OOB, and passing off to B2? I'm going violation, although probably passing on it if B2 was clearly going OOB to be the in-bounder for the play.

[chet_hoyt]

Please allow me to clarify. The foot was covering the endline so that a portion of the foot was in bounds. It was clear to me that the inbounder (B1) was never OOB. In such a case, B2 had the option to take the ball OOB and become the inbounder, correct? If so, since he chose to NOT do that and advance the ball toward the front court, team B exceeded their 5 second time limit to properly inbound the ball.

[SC Official]

Originally Posted by chet_hoyt

Please allow me to clarify. The foot was covering the endline so that a portion of the foot was in bounds. It was clear to me that the inbounder (B1) was never OOB. In such a case, B2 had the option to take the ball OOB and become the inbounder, correct? If so, since he chose to NOT do that and advance the ball toward the front court, team B exceeded their 5 second time limit to properly inbound the ball.

No.

It is a violation to make a throw-in after a made basket from inbounds. It's not a "do-over." It's not a 5-second violation.

It's a violation as soon as the team simulates a throw-in without getting out of bounds.

Just make sure that the thrower is clearly not OOB before whistling it. Don't split hairs.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Billy, this is where one of your "clarifying" posts would actually further the discussion.

Several already beat me to it.

Originally Posted by chet_hoyt

His foot was clearly on the endline as he passed to B2 ...

A player inbounding the ball may step on, but not over the line and onto the court. The “traveling rule” is not in effect during a throwin. During a designated spot throwin, the player inbounding the ball must keep one foot on, or over, the three foot wide designated spot. An inbounding player is allowed to jump, or move one or both feet. A player inbounding the ball may move backward as far as the five second time limit, or space allows. If player moves outside the three foot wide designated spot, it is a throwin violation, not traveling. In gymnasiums with limited space outside the sidelines, and endlines, a defensive player may be asked to step back no more than three feet. A player inbounding the ball may “dribble” the ball on the out of bounds area prior to making a throwin.

Thanks to chet_hoyt's followup post clarification, my post is now irrelevant.

Originally Posted by chet_hoyt

Please allow me to clarify. The foot was covering the endline so that a portion of the foot was in bounds.

Too bad. This thread is right in my wheelhouse. I got out of bed too late this morning. I wonder if Mighty Mouse ever sleeps in?

[chet_hoyt]

Originally Posted by SC Official

It's a violation as soon as the team simulates a throw-in without getting out of bounds.

Interesting. I didn't know that. Is there a rule I can reference? Thanks again.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by chet_hoyt

Interesting. I didn't know that. Is there a rule I can reference?

9-2 ART. 2 The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court
from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds
or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.
ART. 5 The thrower shall not carry the ball onto the court.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

9-2 ART. 2 The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court
from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds
or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.
ART. 5 The thrower shall not carry the ball onto the court.

Chet I understand your point, because even with this rule citation, I think one can continue to say, "but he was never fully OOB, so this rule doesn't apply..." or something similar. However, B1 was clearly attempting to make a throw in, and his foot on the line makes him not out-of-bounds, as far as an inbounder is concerned.

You said you ruled it a 5 second violation, correct? What if B2 had traveled before you reached your 5 count? Would you have just not called anything? What if A1 stole the ball from a dribbling B2? Would you have called a T for interference with a player attempting to "In-bound" a ball?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by frezer11

... and his foot on the line makes him not out-of-bounds, as far as an inbounder ...

You mean "over the line"? Right?

Now sit back and enjoy Brewer & Shipley's greatest hit. Vice President Spiro Agnew said the song was "blatant drug-culture propaganda that threatens to sap our national strength."

https://youtu.be/MNKL9onYB_8

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You mean "over the line"? Right?

You can be vertically over the line....

[SC Official]

There is a case play with this exact situation stating that it's an immediate violation. I don't have my books with me but it is in there.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by frezer11

You can be vertically over the line....

To paraphrase a Peter Paul commercial, sometimes you feel a plane, sometimes you don't.