Stepping OB

[phansen]

NFHS

A1 dribbles up sideline, enters her frontcourt, tries to dribble past B1 near sideline but cannot, B1 has her foot on the sideline. A1 picks up her dribble and steps on top of B1's foot which is still out of bounds.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by phansen

NFHS



A1 dribbles up sideline, enters her frontcourt, tries to dribble past B1 near sideline but cannot, B1 has her foot on the sideline. A1 picks up her dribble and steps on top of B1's foot which is still out of bounds.

That is an interesting question. Never thought of that situation before.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[Mike Goodwin]

Originally Posted by phansen

NFHS

A1 dribbles up sideline, enters her frontcourt, tries to dribble past B1 near sideline but cannot, B1 has her foot on the sideline. A1 picks up her dribble and steps on top of B1's foot which is still out of bounds.

7.1.1 SITUATION A

A1, while holding the ball inbounds near the sideline, touches (a) player B1; (b) a photographer; (c) a coach; (d) an official, all of whom are out of bounds.

A1 is not out of bounds in (a), (b), (c) or (d). To be out of bounds, A1 must touch the floor or some object on or outside a boundary line. People are not considered to be objects and play continues. Inadvertently touching someone who is out of bounds, without gaining an advantage, is not considered a violation.

= = =

This case book play doesn't specify how A1 touches B1 in (a), but presumably it's with a hand. Regardless, as long as A1, while incidentally stepping on B1's foot, isn't also touching out of bounds, should still be considered inbounds.

I hope A1 pivots off B1's foot so we don't have to consider illegal contact if remains there too long and hinders B1's normal defensive movements.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by phansen

A1 dribbles up sideline, enters her frontcourt, tries to dribble past B1 near sideline but cannot, B1 has her foot on the sideline. A1 picks up her dribble and steps on top of B1's foot which is still out of bounds.

RULING: A1 sprains her ankle. Team A requests and is granted a timeout, or A1 sits a tick.

Nice play phansen. Thanks.

To be out of bounds, a player must touch the floor, or some object, on or outside a boundary line. People are not considered to be objects, so if a player inadvertently touches someone who is out of bounds (another player, a photographer, a coach, an official, etc.), without gaining an advantage, is not considered an out of bounds violation. A dribbler has committed a violation if they step on or outside a boundary, even though the dribbler is not touching the ball while they are out of bounds. Out-of-bounds violations do not apply to players involved in interrupted dribbles.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Mike Goodwin

...


I hope A1 pivots off B1's foot so we don't have to consider illegal contact if remains there too long and hinders B1's normal defensive movements.

Would the contact be ruled any differently than we would if B1 was standing on the sideline and A1 ran them over?

Since B1 is not in a legal guarding position, could they be the beneficiary of anything less than an intentional or flagrant foul?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Would the contact be ruled any differently than we would if B1 was standing on the sideline and A1 ran them over? Since B1 is not in a legal guarding position ...

Agree, illegal guarding position (one foot out of bounds), collision, common blocking foul, bonus free throws or no bonus ball for inbound.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree, illegal guarding position (one foot off the court), collision, common blocking foul, bonus free throws, no bonus ball for inbound.

I don't see anything in the OP that indicates a foul (yet).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't see anything in the OP that indicates a foul (yet).

Not in original post:

Originally Posted by Raymond

… B1 was standing on the sideline and A1 ran them over?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Would the contact be ruled any differently than we would if B1 was standing on the sideline and A1 ran them over?

Since B1 is not in a legal guarding position, could they be the beneficiary of anything less than an intentional or flagrant foul?

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Yes, B1 has the right to occupy any position on the court and cannot be dislodged from there. B1 does not have LGP though, so does not get the extra defensive rights which that conveys, such as the ability to be moving laterally or obliquely at the time of contact. However, if B1 is stationary, then LGP is not necessary and A1 would be called for charging should he run over this defender.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yes, B1 has the right to occupy any position on the court and cannot be dislodged from there. B1 does not have LGP though, so does not get the extra defensive rights which that conveys, such as the ability to be moving laterally or obliquely at the time of contact. However, if B1 is stationary, then LGP is not necessary and A1 would be called for charging should he run over this defender.

Agree.

[bob jenkins]

2004-05 Interps
SITUATION 13: A1 is dribbling near the sideline when B1 obtains legal guarding position. B1 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline or (b) one foot in the air over the out-of-bounds area when A1 contacts B1 in the torso. RULING: In (a), B1 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position. In (b), A1 is called for a player-control foul because B2 had obtained and maintained legal guarding position. (4-23-2; 4-23-3a)

(a similar interp was given in 2003-04)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

2004-05 Interps SITUATION 13: A1 is dribbling near the sideline when B1 obtains legal guarding position. B1 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline ... RULING: In (a), B1 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position.

Wow! Great research. An interpretation that "disappeared" almost a dozen and a half years ago. Fooled Nevadaref (the "Interpretation King"), Camron Rust, and later me, after reading their posts. Impressive. Thanks.

4-23-1: Every player is entitled to a spot on the playing court provided such player gets there first without illegally contacting an opponent.

I do recall videos of late game set plays where inbounders run the end line and defenders run over screeners where the screeners have a foot on the endline, and are called for blocking fouls, even though stationary and facing the opponent. Of course, since the rule changed and we no longer shoot team control fouls, we will seldom see this late game set play anymore, and that's a good thing.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

... a similar interp was given in 2003-04 ...

SITUATION 7: B1 obtains a legal guarding position on A1, who is dribbling the ball near the sideline. There is no contact by A1 while B1 has both feet on the playing court. B1 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the out-of-bounds boundary line, or (b) one foot in the air over the out-of-bounds boundary line when A1 contacts B1 in the torso. RULING: In (a), a blocking foul shall be called on B1. B1 may not be touching out of bounds. In (b), a player-control foul shall be called on A1; B1 had established and maintained a legal guarding position. (4-23-2,3; 4-35-1)

[billyu2]

The definition of the "playing court" is found in the very first rule in the book.