Where is the Throw-in?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

The answering got away from the original question. Let me restate the question.
Where is the Throw-in, when a throw-in violation occurs during a throw-in following an Out-of-Bounds violation?
For you IAABO members, look in the IAABO Handbook 2025-2026 pages 412-413 Chapter 12, Segment 2E. So if it is on the sideline, then it goes to the 28' mark.
IAABO posted a 'Make the Call' play. A1 has the ball for a sideline throw-in. The Throw-in is close to the Volleyball attack line. The attack line is 10' from the division line, thus it is 32' from the endline on a 84' high school court. If the court is 94' (NCAA), then this attack line is 37' from the endline. A1 throws the ball directly into the basket. This throw-in must be from an Out-of-Bounds violation because the throw-in IS NOT at the 28' mark. Their correct response to the play is Team B gets the throw-in at the designated 28' mark. Thus the new throw-in 'moves' slightly from 32' to 28' from the endline.
That's my answer and I'm sticking to it. BillyMac get out your slide ruler
I hope the 'New' rule will be clearly stated. :-)

I agree with IAABO that the second throw-in in the above play would be from the 28' mark.

It's not a repeat, or a continuation, of the original throw-in, nor is it a throw-in under the same conditions

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I agree with IAABO that the second throw-in in the above play would be from the 28' mark.

I agree with bob jenkins.

The new 2026-27 IAABO Handbook (rules, case plays, mechnaics) just came out online and seems to imply that bob jennings is correct, but it's poorly worded.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The new 2026-27 IAABO Handbook (rules, case plays, mechanics) just came out online and seems to imply that bob jennings is correct, but it's poorly worded.

[Zoochy]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

That's what I have been saying this whole time.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

That's what I have been saying this whole time.

You certainly showed us!

Wait? What?

Aren't we supposed to show you?

[Zoochy]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

You certainly showed us!

Wait? What?

Aren't we supposed to show you?

I have been told... Officials don't want to hear what I have to say. They do not want me to speak, Even when I am spoken to. Just listen

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

I have been told... Officials don't want to hear what I have to say. They do not want me to speak, Even when I am spoken to. Just listen

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

I have been told ... They do not want me to speak ... Just listen ...

Not only am I a very curious person, but I also want details, and I'm never satisfied until I get all my questions answered.

During all my thirty years of teaching middle school science, I was always limited to only three questions at all monthly faculty meetings.

Somehow my referee colleagues discovered this, and I was likewise limited to only three questions at our local referee board's meetings.

[bwburke94]

The wording on 3. is: "When a throw-in violation occurs during a throw-in for a violation (other than an out-of-bounds violation)".

The only reasonable way this can be parsed is that this applies only if the original throw-in was not for an OOB violation, because otherwise it would have been worded as "When a throw-in violation (other than an out-of-bounds violation) occurs during a throw-in for a violation".

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bwburke94

The wording on 3. is: "When a throw-in violation occurs during a throw-in for a violation (other than an out-of-bounds violation)". The only reasonable way this can be parsed is that this applies only if the original throw-in was not for an OOB violation, because otherwise it would have been worded as "When a throw-in violation (other than an out-of-bounds violation) occurs during a throw-in for a violation".

Odd wording by IAABO.

If the original throw in was for other than an out of bounds violation, then it must have been for another type of violation, a foul, or some other stoppage in play and would have been at one of the eight spots anyway.

Various types of timeouts could complicate the issue.

[JRutledge]

I am still trying to get the confusion. If it is not a violation for a throw-in, then it goes to the out-of-bounds spot. Why are we still struggling with this, and why are we adding timeouts to it? If the violation occurs, we do not move the new spot. When would that ever happen?

Also, this is basically how the NF describes this right now. For some reason, it was never noted like the other violations at the location of the possible spot in Rule 9. This is to help correct this.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... why are we adding timeouts to it?

Ordinary garden variety live ball clock running timeout requested and granted? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

Out of bounds violation followed by a requested and granted timeout? Throwin at the spot closest to the out of bounds.

Non out of bounds violation, foul, or any other stoppage in play? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

Out of bounds violation followed by a requested and granted timeout followed by a throwin violation? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

Non out of bounds violation, foul, or any other stoppage in play followed by a throwin violation? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Non out of bounds violation, foul, or any other stoppage in play? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

Of course.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Out of bounds violation followed by a requested and granted timeout followed by a throwin violation? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

Why? Where in any rules does it say if you have an out of bounds violation you move the spot because of a timeout? Why? The spot is where the timeout took place, just like always.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Non out of bounds violation, foul, or any other stoppage in play followed by a throwin violation? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

It is one of the 8 spots because of the violation or foul, not because of the timeout. We would put the ball before because of where the ball was located when a timeout is called. The timeout situation is as it has always been based on factors of where we calling the timeout and put it at the closest spot. Now we have the spots on the FC and BC and we put it simply based on if it is outside the 3 point line or inside the 3 point line. Sorry, but not sure where you are getting that we move any spot because a timeout changes things.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Out of bounds violation followed by a requested and granted timeout followed by a throwin violation? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Why? Where in any rules does it say if you have an out of bounds violation you move the spot because of a timeout? Why? The spot is where the timeout took place, just like always.

It's moved to one of the eight spots because of the throwin violation, not because of the timeout.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Non out of bounds violation, foul, or any other stoppage in play? Throwin at one of the eight spots.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

It is one of the 8 spots because of the violation or foul, not because of the timeout.

What timeout?

I did not mention a timeout in this situation.