Fun With A Throwin Spot …

[BillyMac]

Observe the video and make a determination as to where should be the throw-in spot.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...IgV9xHim3I.mp4

Two choices: The throw-in is correctly administered on the sideline where the ball went out-of-bounds after the violation for kicking. The throw-in should have taken place on the endline nearest to where the violation occurred.

My comment: The throw-in should have taken place on the endline nearest to where the violation occurred. After a violation, the ball is awarded to the opponents for a throwin from an out of bounds spot nearest the violation.

Note: I don’t believe that this video will generate any controversy. The reason I posted it is that the throwin spot after another type of violation, backcourt, can occasionally stymie some inexperienced officials, where the ball may not necessarily be put in play at the division line, but, rather, is always put back in play at the spot nearest the violation, which can be anywhere in the backcourt.

[Danvrapp]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The throw-in should have taken place on the endline nearest to where the violation occurred.

That.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Danvrapp

That.

And, if the original throw-in allowed whit to run the end-line, white can still run the end-line

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

And, if the original throw-in allowed white to run the end-line, white can still run the end-line

Great point. I knew that this "simple" play had potential to have some educational value.

7.5.7 SITUATION B: Team A scores a field goal. B1 picks up the ball after the made basket, then proceeds out of bounds to start the throw-in process. B1 runs along the end line out of bounds while attempting to find an open teammate for the throw-in. Immediately after B1 releases the throw-in pass, (a) the ball is kicked by A2 near the end line; or (c) the ball is deflected out of bounds across the end line off of A2. RULING: In (a) A2 has violated by kicking the ball. In (a), Team B will be awarded a throw-in and retain the right to run the end line on the ensuing throw-in. In (c), A2 legally contacted the ball and subsequently hit it out of bounds, ending the throw-in. Team B is awarded a designated spot throw-in on the end line.

[crosscountry55]

Also, had that been an AP throw-in, the throw-in team would not have lost the arrow; the arrow would be postponed until the next AP situation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Also, had that been an AP throw-in, the throw-in team would not have lost the arrow; the arrow would be postponed until the next AP situation.

4.42.5 SITUATION: Team A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. A1’s throw-in pass is illegally kicked by B2. RULING: As a result of B2’s kicking violation, Team A is awarded a new throw-in at the designated spot nearest to where the kicking violation (illegal touching) occurred. Since the alternating-possession throw-in had not been contacted legally, the throw-in has not ended and therefore, the arrow remains with Team A for the next alternating-possession throw-in. COMMENT: The kicking violation ends the alternating-possession throw-in and as a result, a non-alternating-possession throw-in is administered. When the ball is legally touched on the subsequent throw-in following the kicking violation, the arrow shall not be changed and shall remain with Team A. (6-4-5)

Almost screwed this up once in a junior varsity game. My partner, a first year rookie, set me straight. Good partner.

[JRutledge]

Huh???

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

When the ball is legally touched on the subsequent throw-in following the kicking violation, the arrow shall not be changed and shall remain with Team A. Almost screwed this up once in a junior varsity game. My partner, a first year rookie, set me straight. Good partner.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Huh???

I wanted to change the arrow after the legal throwin after the kick. That had been the "old" rule before the rule was changed from changing the arrow to not changing the arrow in this situation.

[BillyMac]

Disclaimer: For IAABO eyes only. Below is not a NFHS interpretation, it's only an IAABO International interpretation which obviously doesn't mean a hill of beans to most members of this Forum.

https://storage.googleapis.com/refqu...IgV9xHim3I.mp4

IAABO International Play Commentary: Correct Answer: The throw-in should have taken place on the endline nearest to where the violation occurred.

Kicking the ball is intentionally striking it with any part of the leg or foot. (4-29, 9-4 note) As with any violation, when a kicking violation occurs, the official must place the ball at the disposal of an opponent of the player who committed the violation at a designated out-of-bounds spot throw-in nearest the violation: (7-5-2)

During a designated spot throw-in on the endline, the defender in the red jersey extends his right leg and block the throw-in pass out of bounds on the sideline. In this play, the fact that the ball when out-of-bounds over the sideline is irrelevant as the defender near the endline had already committed the kicking violation. Therefore, the correct ruling is a kicking violation on red and the ball to be awarded to the White team with a designated spot throw-in along the endline.

It should be noted; if this throw-in occurred after a goal or after a violation where points were awarded, the white team would have had the ability to move along the endline. In that case, a kicking violation would not cause the throw-in team to lose the ability to move along the endline on the ensuing throw-in. (Assuming the kicking violation occurs near the endline and the ensuing throw-in will be along the endline). (7-5-7b)

What if this was an Alternating-Possession throw-in? When a kicking violation occurs by the defensive team on an Alternating-Possession throw-in, the ball is awarded back to the throw-in team at a spot nearest where the violation occurred. Since the ensuing throw-in is a result of a violation, it is no longer an AP throw-in. Therefore, the throw-in team does not lose the AP arrow after the completion of the throw-in. (6-4-5).

Here is the breakdown of the IAABO members that commented on the video: The throw-in should have taken place on the endline nearest to where the violation occurred 94% (including me); The throw-in is correctly administered on the sideline where the ball went out-of-bounds after the violation for kicking 6%.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

It should be noted; if this throw-in occurred after a goal or after a violation where points were awarded, the white team would have had the ability to move along the endline. In that case, a kicking violation would not cause the throw-in team to lose the ability to move along the endline on the ensuing throw-in. (Assuming the kicking violation occurs near the endline and the ensuing throw-in will be along the endline). (7-5-7b)

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

And, if the original throw-in allowed white to run the end-line, white can still run the end-line

Originally Posted by BillyMac

What if this was an Alternating-Possession throw-in? When a kicking violation occurs by the defensive team on an Alternating-Possession throw-in, the ball is awarded back to the throw-in team at a spot nearest where the violation occurred. Since the ensuing throw-in is a result of a violation, it is no longer an AP throw-in. Therefore, the throw-in team does not lose the AP arrow after the completion of the throw-in. (6-4-5). [/I]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Also, had that been an AP throw-in, the throw-in team would not have lost the arrow; the arrow would be postponed until the next AP situation.