Classic Trick Play ...
 

Below is a question from the 2023-24 IAABO Refresher Exam. I’ve already submitted my answer sheet and know my score, but I don’t know if I got this question correct, or incorrect, but I’m fairly certain that I got it correct.

It’s an open book exam. Our local board sanctions and schedules Refresher Exam study groups, where we can discuss our answers. If we attend such a study group we get rulebook and/or casebook citations (but no answers), both IAABO citations and NFHS citations, to direct us to the correct answers.

42) A-1 has the ball out of bounds for a throw-in but cannot find a teammate available to receive a pass. A-1 throws the ball against an opponent, steps inbounds, and retrieves the ball. The official rules a throw-in violation. Is the official correct?

Citations for this question include NFHS 4-42-5-A; 7-6-2; and 9-2-6.

My answer: No.

We’ve all seen this “trick play” dozens of times over decades, always ruled a legal play.

Some in our study group suggested that this may now be illegal because of the new rule this year:

9-3-3: Out Of Bounds: 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 or to avoid a violation.

While I’m not sure if the new rule makes this “trick play” illegal, or not, I am certain that this would not be a “throw-in violation”, as stated in the question, but if it were to be deemed illegal, it would be an “out of bounds violation”, thus my confident answer "No".

My question for the Forum regarding this question is does the new rule 9-3-3 make this classic “trick play” now illegal?

Did A-1 step out of bounds under his own volition, or was he required to do so by the official because it was a throwin situation?

I say the latter, and that this classic “trick play” is still legal.

What says the Forum?

Some either over think it, or like to try to trick the group, or are trying too hard to play devil's advocate.

No Consensus ...
 

For once, it wasn't me.

It was our study group leader, he was being sincere and serious, and his question led to a five-plus minute discussion with no consensus answer leading to closure.

Why would you not know whether or not 9-3-3 affects this play? What is causing your own personal confusion to think that 9-3-3 would make this trick play now illegal?

And please don't say because the study group leader said so.

And what's really blowing my mind is the thought that stepping out of bounds for a throw-in would be considered "on their own volition". So what happens after a time out? Is nobody allowed to be the first person to touch the ball?

If you really want to up the level of the conversation, then discuss the principles involved if, after a made basket, a second teammate comes out of bounds, receives the ball from the original thrower-in and then does the off-the-defender's back trick play.

(And also as a side note, you don't always have to give us a full explanation to these open book tests and collaborations you participate in. No one cares what you're doing on your test, plus it's done everywhere. It's openly announced in our associatiin meetings to get together and get the correct answers.)

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

This is a legal play. The ball was legally touched inbounds, so A can recover it without committing a violation. This has no relation to 9-3-3, because the thrower-in is allowed to be out of bounds during the throw-in. As long as he does not "deceitfully delay his return" imboundsl, he commits no foul or violation.

Ordinary Throwin Play ...
 

While I'm, locally, considered to be pretty good with rules, there are a many guys who I will listen to. He made us think about this play, I (and many others) couldn't change his mind, I (and many others) got it right, he probably got it wrong.

Citations alone proved it wasn't a question based on the new rule, just an ordinary throwin play, not an out of bounds play.

Deceitfully Delay His Return Inbounds ...
 

Good point.