Need some imput on a play

[MOVBlue]

This was a Varsity boys game situation brought up in our board meeting over the weekend,

Team A inbounding the ball from a spot near the 3 point line with a designated spot. His teammates line up in line parallel to the endline maybe 2 or 3 feet inbounds on the opposite side of the court. A1 throws the inbound pass across the court to his last teammate in line standing near the endline. In flight B1 deflects the ball to the floor out of bounds by reaching across the endline into OOB territory. He was about the far lane line, 20 feet or more away from the thrower - A1 throwing the ball in. The coach instantly is calling for a technical foul for reaching across the endline and touching the ball.

7-6-4: "The opponent(s) of the thrower must not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in boundary plane until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass."


Can anyone shed some light on this situation? Technical or simply ball awarded back to team A for another spot throw-in from the new spot?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by MOVBlue

This was a Varsity boys game situation brought up in our board meeting over the weekend,

Team A inbounding the ball from a spot near the 3 point line with a designated spot. His teammates line up in line parallel to the endline maybe 2 or 3 feet inbounds on the opposite side of the court. A1 throws the inbound pass across the court to his last teammate in line standing near the endline. In flight B1 deflects the ball to the floor out of bounds by reaching across the endline into OOB territory. He was about the far lane line, 20 feet or more away from the thrower - A1 throwing the ball in. The coach instantly is calling for a technical foul for reaching across the endline and touching the ball.

7-6-4: "The opponent(s) of the thrower must not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in boundary plane until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass."


Can anyone shed some light on this situation? Technical or simply ball awarded back to team A for another spot throw-in from the new spot?

1) The ball had been released on a throw-in pass. The rule you cited does not apply. B can reach across and touch the ball. A's ball OOB at the (new) throw-in spot.

2) Passing to another teammate who is OOB (when allowed) is NOT a throw-in pass. The rule you cited DOES apply. (edit: You removed this play as I was replying)

[MOVBlue]

Agreed on both situations, but have gotten contradictory information from some that are treating the situation the same.

My argument was that in the spot throw in the pass is supposed to be to a player on the court inbounds (in theory anyway) where after a made basket between teammates out of bounds isn't.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by MOVBlue

The coach instantly is calling for a technical foul for reaching across the endline and touching the ball.

That tells you exactly why the coach ran this play. He’s looking for cheap points, or at least to stir up controversy with your crew. I really dislike those kinds of coaches.

Originally Posted by MOVBlue

7-6-4: "The opponent(s) of the thrower must not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in boundary plane until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass."

You answered your own question before you even asked it...

Originally Posted by MOVBlue

Can anyone shed some light on this situation? Technical or simply ball awarded back to team A for another spot throw-in from the new spot?

If the reach across was after the ball is released, there’s nothing but an ordinary OOB violation here. I don’t have my casebook with me but I believe this is a little different on a non-DSTI situation, provided the pass from one teammate to another is not the actual pass “directly into the court.” In this case, it’s a DOG warning, but not a T because the ball has to be in a thrower’s possession for the T to apply.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ilyazhito]

Did the team have a prior delay warning? If so, the officials would have assessed a T anyway.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

That tells you exactly why the coach ran this play. He’s looking for cheap points, or at least to stir up controversy with your crew. I really dislike those kinds of coaches.



You answered your own question before you even asked it...




If the reach across was after the ball is released, there’s nothing but an ordinary OOB violation here. I don’t have my casebook with me but I believe this is a little different on a non-DSTI situation, provided the pass from one teammate to another is not the actual pass “directly into the court.” In this case, it’s a DOG warning, but not a T because the ball has to be in a thrower’s possession for the T to apply.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The play described in the OP is simply a throw-in pass which is deflected out of bounds in an NFHS game. Curiously, the NCAA rule is different and the defender must wait for the passed ball to break the boundary plane before touching it!

The situation in which the team may run the end line is different. In that case, a pass to another teammate behind the boundary plane is not the throw-in pass and therefore the defender is subject to a technical foul for breaking the plane and contacting the ball. The case play does specify that it is both a delay warning and a T.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by ilyazhito

Did the team have a prior delay warning? If so, the officials would have assessed a T anyway.

Nope, you don’t understand the play.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The situation in which the team may run the end line is different. In that case, a pass to another teammate behind the boundary plane is not the throw-in pass and therefore the defender is subject to a technical foul for breaking the plane and contacting the ball. The case play does specify that it is both a delay warning and a T.

Reference please. I could be wrong but I thought the interpretation and/or rule was that unless the ball was actually in contact with someone on the OOB side of the plane, while it could be a DOG (or Team T), it could not be a Player T for reaching through and contacting the ball.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Reference please. I could be wrong but I thought the interpretation and/or rule was that unless the ball was actually in contact with someone on the OOB side of the plane, while it could be a DOG (or Team T), it could not be a Player T for reaching through and contacting the ball.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Rule 9-2-10

Penalty 3. If an opponent(s) reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touches or dislodges the ball while in possession of the thrower or being passed to a teammate outside the boundary line (as in 7-5-7), a technical foul must be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required. See 10-4-10 PENALTY.

NCAA-Men's

Rule 9-4
Art. 4. The opponents of the thrower-in shall not reach through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touch or dislodge the ball while it is in the possession
of the thrower-in or is being passed to a teammate outside the boundary line as in Rule 7-4.6.b. The penalty is a Class B technical foul per Rule 10-4.1.i.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The play described in the OP is simply a throw-in pass which is deflected out of bounds in an NFHS game. Curiously, the NCAA rule is different and the defender must wait for the passed ball to break the boundary plane before touching it!...

Rule 9-4
Art. 3. The opponents of the thrower-in shall not have any part of their person beyond the vertical inside plane of any boundary line before the ball has crossed that boundary line. Repeated infractions shall result in a Class B technical foul

[MOVBlue]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

That tells you exactly why the coach ran this play. He’s looking for cheap points, or at least to stir up controversy with your crew. I really dislike those kinds of coaches.



You answered your own question before you even asked it...




If the reach across was after the ball is released, there’s nothing but an ordinary OOB violation here. I don’t have my casebook with me but I believe this is a little different on a non-DSTI situation, provided the pass from one teammate to another is not the actual pass “directly into the court.” In this case, it’s a DOG warning, but not a T because the ball has to be in a thrower’s possession for the T to apply.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

He was absolutely looking for cheap points -- he was down 5 at about a minute to play when he had his team run it. The crew on the game did have video and this team knew exactly what they were doing (or appeared to by they way the new to line up quickly in an odd formation for a throw in).

Problem was that no one could find casebook scenario for this situation. So it is currently being left to everyone to make there own decision on it. Some were quick to jump on the Tech Foul side, while many (myself included) say that this is just another spot throw in at the new spot.

Very interesting that at the NCAA level it has to be "in" to be touched and is delineated in the rules, while not really even discussed in NFHS ruleset.