Throw-in Violation or Out of Bounds Violation
 

Scenario:

Team A has been awarded a designated sport throw-in on the end line. Player A1 from Team A throws an errant pass to teammate A2. Teammate A2 has to go out of bounds to catch the ball. The ball doesn't touch any other player before touching teammate A2.

What do you have? Out of Bounds violation or Throw-in violation? Where does Team B throw the ball in? From the designated spot where Team A was or at the spot on the sideline where teammate B caught the ball out of bounds?

It is an Out of Bounds Violation. 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.
These are the best Rules for the described play.
7-2-1
7-6-2

Out Of Bounds Violation ...
 

Great question, easy to answer for younger (younger than me) officials. It's not a throwin violation. It's simply an out of bounds violation, ball at the spot nearest the out of bounds violation, to the non-out of bounds team.

9-2-2: Throw-In Provisions: The ball must be passed by the thrower directly into the court from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.

Now for guys who have been officiating over forty years, like me, this could be confusing (isn't everything confusing at our age) because this used to be a throwin violation.

To make it more confusing, if Team A, the inbounding team, threw the inbound pass directly to a Team B player who was out of bounds, this was considered a throwin violation by Team A, and the ball was given to Team B back at original spot of the throwin. Thankfully, to quote the raven, "Nevermore".

Am I right Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.?

Citations ...
 

Letters and Numbers ...
 

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).

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.

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

Thank you all for clarifying this!

Glory Days (Bruce Springsteen, 1985) ...
 

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.

Thank You Don Cornelius ...
 

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.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/5P-TXxoWTSE" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen></iframe>

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.

Old Interpretation ...
 

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.

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.

If A1 is the thrower and A2 crosses the boundary plane on the same end line or side line as the thrower before catching the throw-in pass, which does not break the plane of the boundary, this could certainly be a throw-in violation per 9-2-3.