Throw-in Violation or Out of Bounds Violation

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

Team A has been awarded a designated sport throw-in on the end line. Player A from Team A throws an errant pass to teammate B. Teammate B has to go out of bounds to catch the ball. The ball doesn't touch any other player before touching teammate B.

Originally Posted by Zoochy

Player B touched the ball while Out of Bounds. The new Throw-in will be awarded to Team A at the spot where Player B touched the ball while being out of bounds.

Be careful here Zoochy. I believe that Afrosheen deviated from the usual method of designating teams (letters) and players (numbers). I believe that the ball goes to Team B (not mentioned in the post, Team B being the non inbounding team since the ball was out of bounds off of a teammate of Player A).

[Camron Rust]

First, players on the same team and the team with the ball are traditionally called A1 and A2. Players on the team without the ball are B1, B2, etc.

So, I'm assuming your question was about two players on the same team.

Others have answered that question, but, consider this....what if it were a throw-in violation? If it were, that means that, for a throw-in near the boundary line, team B could just ensure they had one foot OOB and touch the ball in order to cause a throw-in violation on team A. Does that make any sense? For team B to touch the ball while OOB and then get possession of the ball as a result? Of course not. Thus, it is an OOB violation on team B...team A's ball at the spot where it was touched OOB.

[Afrosheen]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Be careful here Zoochy. I believe that Afrosheen deviated from the usual method of designating teams (letters) and players (numbers). I believe that the ball goes to Team B (not mentioned in the post, Team B being the non inbounding team since the ball was out of bounds off of a teammate of Player A).

Sorry, I amended the original post to clarify. Thanks for the reminder.

[Afrosheen]

Thank you all for clarifying this!

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

Thank you all for clarifying this!

A great question that pops up occasionally because some older veteran officials may remember it from ancient times officiating as a throwin violation, and some less older veteran officials may remember it as a throwin violation from their ancient times playing days.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Afrosheen

Thank you all for clarifying this!

I remember Afro Sheen hair care products sponsoring the musical dance television show Soul Train hosted by Don Cornelius in the 1970’s.

I’m a white guy but I enjoyed Motown style rhythm and blues music and soul music, and I still do to this day.

The "Line Dances" were great.

[Scrapper1]

Devil's Advocate:

9-2-11: No teammates of the thrower shall be out of bounds after a designated-spot throw-in begins.

Since A2 went OOB to catch the throw-in pass, perhaps A2 violated before even touching the ball. That would make it a throw-in violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Devil's Advocate: 9-2-11: No teammates of the thrower shall be out of bounds after a designated-spot throw-in begins. Since A2 went OOB to catch the throw-in pass, perhaps A2 violated before even touching the ball. That would make it a throw-in violation.

Good point and possibly the reason for the old interpretation.

And possibly another example of a well intentioned NFHS rule and interpretation change where the NFHS did not do their thorough due diligence and properly edit all rule language in regard to the change.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Devil's Advocate:

9-2-11: No teammates of the thrower shall be out of bounds after a designated-spot throw-in begins.

Since A2 went OOB to catch the throw-in pass, perhaps A2 violated before even touching the ball. That would make it a throw-in violation.

I believe the intent of that rule is not allow them to switch throwers (or to have a teammate standing OOB as if they would be a thrower). I don't think it is meant to apply to a teammate trying to catch the throwin but going OOB in trying to do so.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I believe the intent of that rule is not allow them to switch throwers (or to have a teammate standing OOB as if they would be a thrower). I don't think it is meant to apply to a teammate trying to catch the throwin but going OOB in trying to do so.

I actually agree with you 100%. I was just trying to stir the pot, maybe generate some discussion. But the intent of the rule is clearly for the original scenario to be an OOB violation.