Inbounds Violation ???
 

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/YNkPtBnmj8M?start=121" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Comments?

Did Blue #3 ever get fully out of bounds before disposal (before she "stepped in")?

Was Blue #3 out of bounds (her left foot was in the air) when Blue #22 passed it to her?

Isn't the inbounder allowed to touch the ball inbounds before going out of bounds?

I do realize that the inbounder need not get both feet out of bounds (one foot out of bounds, one foot in the air, allowed).

Was the violation for stepping onto the court before releasing the inbounds pass, or for never getting out of bounds?

What a crazy play?

When I first saw it live last night I said to myself, "I wouldn't call that in my game".

Then saw the replay last night and I said, "Maybe".

Then the replay again today and I'm having trouble breaking it down.

Help.

Care to be a little more specific when posting an 18-minute video?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry ...
 

I made a mistake while embedding (forgot to time stamp it).

I think that I fixed it.

2:00 mark on video. 1:15 on game clock.

Inbounds violation? I don't know what that is.

Throw-in violation? No, I'm not calling that a throw in violation. Personally, I'm not considering the ball at disposal until the point where #3 was inbounds, thus allowing her to step out of bounds and complete the throw in.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

Violation ???
 

... and I'm not sure what the official called?

I’m pretty sure he called a throw-in violation. As has been discussed here from time to time before, it’s too bad there’s not a specific signal for that.

It was a CI. The thrower gets to establish themselves out of bounds with the ball first, and while it looked funny, that hadn’t happened. She was out without the ball, then in with it, then retreated to out with it, and threw it in from that point. Legal play.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Official displayed a subtle "over & back" signal.

No inbounds violation. The player did not try to pull a fast one and advance the ball before going out of bounds.

That's not a criterion. It may not have been a violation, but the reason you give is nonsensical.

The player was not inbounds when she threw the ball in. The throw-in happened after the player had established herself out of bounds (one foot out of bounds, none of her body touching inbounds). If the player had a foot inbounds, we would have another story.

When Blue 22 throws the ball to Blue 3 it is not at yet at the disposal for a throw-in. When B3 first touches the ball, her right foot is on the floor OOB, her left foot is in the air by this time. She is fully OOB (not touching anything inbounds), the ball is OOB. I don't believe that she has player control until both feet are in the air. Technically, she and the ball are still OOB at this time, but I can't believe anybody expects this position to be "at the disposal." In my opinion, the throw-in has not started yet. She backed up to a proper OOB position, at which point the throw-in is at her disposal and a 5 second count should have started.