Step Out Of Bounds ...

[BillyMac]

9-3-3: Establishes that a player may step out of bounds without penalty unless they are the first player to touch the ball after returning to the court or if they left the court to avoid a violation.

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

... now has to know when the pass was released from an area where normally they shouldn't be looking or might not even be able to see at all.

A2 runs out of bounds around a double screen and comes back onto the court and catches a pass from A1 ...

A) A1 was holding (touching) the ball after A2 reentered the playing court.

B) A1's pass was already on the way (released) after A2 reentered the playing court.

Legal in A, illegal in B?

First to touch?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

9-3-3: Establishes that a player may step out of bounds without penalty unless they are the first player to touch the ball after returning to the court or if they left the court to avoid a violation.



A2 runs out of bounds around a double screen and comes back onto the court and catches a pass from A1 ...

A) A1 was holding(touching) the ball after A2 reentered the playing court.

B) A1's pass was already on the way (released) after A2 reentered the playing court.

Legal in A, illegal in B?

First to touch?

Both a violation.

[SNIPERBBB]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Both a violation.

The way I understood the interpreters presentation the other day A would be legal.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

9-3-3: Establishes that a player may step out of bounds without penalty unless they are the first player to touch the ball after returning to the court or if they left the court to avoid a violation.

A2 runs out of bounds around a double screen and comes back onto the court and catches a pass from A1 ... A1 was holding (touching) the ball after A2 reentered the playing court

Wouldn't A2 be the second to touch the ball after returning to the court?

Wouldn't A1 be the first to touch the ball the ball after A2 returned to the court?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Wouldn't A2 be the second to touch the ball after returning to the court?

Wouldn't A1 be the first to touch the ball the ball after A2 returned to the court?

Under your logic the rule would only apply if A2 came inbounds when no other player has PC.

The point of that particular element of the rule is to prevent A1 passing to A2 after A2 returns inbounds.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Under your logic the rule would only apply if A2 came inbounds when no other player has PC.

The point of that particular element of the rule is to prevent A1 passing to A2 after A2 returns inbounds.

Gotta agree with you but that's not what the rule states.

This certainly would be illegal.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

A2 runs out of bounds around a double screen and comes back onto the court and catches a pass from A1 ... A1's pass was already on the way (released) after A2 reentered the playing court.

9-3-3: Establishes that a player may step out of bounds without penalty unless they are the first player to touch the ball after returning to the court ...

I've got lot of questions regarding the wording of this new rule.

Hopefully some new casebook plays (I haven't gotten my new casebook yet), or new annual interpretations (due soon) will clear this up.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

The way I understood the interpreters predeythr other day A would be legal.

I am not sure what you mean by "interpreters predeythr" but in A it is legal if the never throw the ball to the player or throw it to another player first.

Peace

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

Under your logic the rule would only apply if A2 came inbounds when no other player has PC.

The point of that particular element of the rule is to prevent A1 passing to A2 after A2 returns inbounds.

Or to prevent a player to go out of bounds and get a loose ball. Not as common but both situations fit under this rule.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

in A it is legal if the never throw the ball to the player or throw it to another player first.

Agree.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

A2 runs out of bounds around a double screen and comes back onto the court and catches a pass from A1 ... A) A1 was holding (touching) the ball after A2 reentered the playing court.

Who was the first to touch the ball after A2 reentered the playing court?

A1 was the first to touch the ball after A2 reentered the playing court (he was touching it after A2 reentered the playing court before he passed it to A2).

9-3-3: A player shall not step out of bounds under the player’s own volition and then become the first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court ...

Perhaps we should refer to A1 as "Player Zero"?

Is there an ordinal number for zero?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Agree.



Who was the first to touch the ball after A2 reentered the playing court?

A1 was the first to touch the ball after A2 reentered the playing court (he was touching it after A2 reentered the playing court before he passed it to A2).

9-3-3: A player shall not step out of bounds under the player’s own volition and then become the first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court ...

Perhaps we should refer to A1 as "Player Zero"?

Is there an ordinal number for zero?

A1 was not the first to touch the ball. They had the ball already.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

A1 was not the first to touch the ball. They had the ball already.

Thanks JRutledge.

I really like your simple, yet highly rational and thoughtful, explanation.

Hopefully we'll get some new casebook plays, or new annual interpretations (due soon), to clear this up.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Thanks JRutledge.

I really like your simple, yet highly rational and thoughtful, explanation.

Hopefully we'll get some new casebook plays, or new annual interpretations (due soon), to clear this up.

Peace

[Raymond]

In my 18 years of officiating men's college basketball, I may have made that call 5 times. I wouldn't obsess about it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Raymond

In my 18 years of officiating men's college basketball, I may have made that call 5 times. I wouldn't obsess about it.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

I had my first scrimmage last night of the season and I had an offensive player run out of bounds on his own and come back in, it was not a violation because they passed the ball to someone else.

Peace

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by SNIPERBBB

The way I understood the interpreters presentation the other day A would be legal.

Either your interpreter or your understanding of what was said is incorrect.