IAABO Between The Lines Rule Quiz ...
 

Latest IAABO Between The Lines Rule Quiz. Three interesting questions that needed some thought.

A1 ends their dribble in their backcourt. A1 throws a long pass that hits their backboard and rebounds back to them in their backcourt. The Trail official rules a backcourt violation. True or False?
True- 9-9-2.
Team control exists during a pass, and a pass is not a try, which would have ended team control.

During a jump ball to start the game, A2 fouls B2 before the tossing official releases the ball. The U1 rules an intentional technical foul on A2. True or False?
True- 4-19-3-c & 4-19-5-c
6-1-2-A: The ball becomes live when: On a jump ball, the tossed ball leaves the official’s hand(s).

The Lead official bounces the ball to A1. Prior to A1 catching the ball B2 fouls A2. The Lead official rules a personal foul against B2. True or False?
False- 4-19-1.
Technical foul.
6-1-2-B: The ball becomes live when: On a throw-in, it is at the disposal of the thrower.

Except there is a specific nfhs case play (9.5) which states that a player may throw the ball off his own backboard and retrieve the ball without violating. Does that same play ruling negate a backcourt violation? Probably, but if not I’m deeming the thrown ball a try for goal, not a pass, per 4-41-2.

Perhaps, but it may also be permissible to ignore the contact per the note to 4-19-1. The specific language of that note does say contact after the ball has become dead and in this case we have a ball which is dead and have yet to be made live prior to the start of the game, so there is a small semantic issue. However, the spirit and intent of the rule is to not penalize what would otherwise be a normal contact foul during a dead ball period. The official should only penalize if the act is deemed intentional or flagrant.
Per the same rule cited above, this action should likely be ignored and not penalized.

Citations ...
 

9.5 SITUATION: A1 dribbles and comes to a stop after which he/she throws the ball against: (a) his/her own backboard; (b) the opponent’s backboard; or (c) an official and catches the ball after each. RULING: Legal in (a); a team’s own backboard is considered part of that team’s “equipment” and may be used. In (b) and (c), A1 has violated; throwing the ball against an opponent’s backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. (4-4-5; 4-15-1, 2; Fundamental 19)

4-19-1: A personal foul is a player foul which involves illegal contact with an opponent while the ball is live, which hinders an opponent from performing normal defensive and offensive movements. A personal foul also includes contact by or on an airborne shooter when the ball is dead.

The point of the 2 dead ball foul situations is to show that the fouls have to be ruled technical fouls, not personal fouls. Since the level of contact is not described, it is really moot and useless to debate the officials' judgment on these plays. Hopefully competent officials in this forum already know the contact has to be judged as intentional and/or flagrant.

And the first one is to point out that it is a backcourt violation under 9-9-2 to pass the ball from the backcourt, off the backboard in the frontcourt, and be the first to touch the ball in the backcourt again. This is no different than throwing a pass across the court from A1 in the backcourt to A2 in the backcourt and having the ball bounce in the front court during the pass.

Face Value ...
 

Agree. It appears that Nevadaref, who I believe to be a competent official, took a more subjective and editorial view of these three situations. In the first situation a "long pass", not a try, is described. In the second situation an "intentional … foul", not a common foul, is described.

https://www.myenglishpages.com/image...face-value.jpg

It is different. We have specific rules which inform us that throwing the ball off a backboard is indeed different from throwing it against the floor.

To state that this is the same as some other backcourt situation is too simplistic.

Simple Simon ...
 

Agree.

Which is exactly why I posted these three situations. I believed them to be interesting situations that required some degree of thought.

If they had been simple, I wouldn't have posted them.

https://www.lavenderandlovage.com/wp...mple_simon.jpg

Yes, you would have.

Thought Provoking ...
 

Actually no. I didn't post all the questions from the latest IAABO Between The Lines Rule Quiz, just the thought provoking ones.

Questions about the size, shape, location, and transparency of backboards aren't interesting topics that require any degree of thought, just a good memory.

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