Where is the Throw-in?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... not move a spot because of a timeout. ...

I'm pretty sure that the interpretation, especially in the first year, was that if a player/team called a timeout during a live ball clock running situation (player control, dribbling or holding) in the front court (back court added the second year) that the subsequent throwin would be from one of the four (or eight) closest premarked designated spots, not the spot closest to where the ball was when the timeout was originally requested and granted (as we did for the past century).

This whistle was not due to a foul or a violation, the new rule in its simplest form, but is nevertheless a stoppage in play (like a held ball, or inadvertent whistle) that requires the subsequent throwin to be at one of the four (or eight) closest premarked designated spots.

Note, I'm not talking about a timeout requested and granted during the five seconds during an ongoing live ball (clock stopped) throwin subsequent to an out of bounds violation, nor a time out requested and granted immediately after a whistle (stopping the clock) for an out of bounds violation. I believe that these all go back to the original out of bounds throwin spot.

Could someone please confirm or deny.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm pretty sure that the interpretation, especially in the first year, was that if a player/team called a timeout during a live ball clock running situation (player control, dribbling or holding) in the front court (back court added the second year) that the subsequent throwin would be from one of the four (or eight) closest premarked designated spots, not the spot closest to where the ball was when the timeout was originally requested and granted (as we did for the past century).

This whistle was not due to a foul or a violation, the new rule in its simplest form, but is nevertheless a stoppage in play (like a held ball, or inadvertent whistle) that requires the subsequent throwin to be at one of the four (or eight) closest premarked designated spots.

Note, I'm not talking about a timeout requested and granted during the five seconds during an ongoing live ball (clock stopped) throwin subsequent to an out of bounds violation, nor a time out requested and granted immediately after a whistle (stopping the clock) for an out of bounds violation. I believe that these all go back to the original out of bounds throwin spot.

Could someone please confirm or deny.

Yes, that last paragraph, the next throw-in goes back to the original spot where the timeout was called or granted. That has always been the case, even with the new rule.

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

... you would not move a spot because of a timeout.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I'm pretty sure that the interpretation, especially in the first year, was that if a player/team called a timeout during a live ball clock running situation (player control, dribbling or holding) in the front court (back court added the second year) that the subsequent throwin would be from one of the four (or eight) closest premarked designated spots, not the spot closest to where the ball was when the timeout was originally requested and granted (as we did for the past century) ... This whistle was not due to a foul or a violation, the new rule in its simplest form, but is nevertheless a stoppage in play (like a held ball, or inadvertent whistle) that requires the subsequent throwin to be at one of the four (or eight) closest premarked designated spots.

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Yes, that last paragraph, the next throw-in goes back to the original spot where the timeout was called or granted.

Lets talk about my first paragraph (quoted above).

Is this not one very specific example of a "spot" being "moved" due to a timeout?

Player dribbling the ball requests and is granted timeout while deep in the frontcourt corner outside of the three point arc.

Won't the subsequent inbounds throwin be from the twenty eight foot mark on that side of the court?

Is this not one very specific example of "moving a spot" (in this case moving a spot almost twenty eight feet) "because of a timeout"?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Player dribbling the ball requests and is granted timeout while deep in the frontcourt corner outside of the three point arc.

Won't the subsequent inbounds throwin be from the twenty eight foot mark on that side of the court?

Is this not one very specific example of "moving a spot" (in this case moving a spot almost twenty eight feet) "because of a timeout"?

Yes.

No. At least not as most who speak English would use the phrase "moving a spot." There is no spot until the TO is granted. Then the spot is established and thereafter doesn't move

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No. At least not as most who speak English would use the phrase "moving a spot." There is no spot until the TO is granted. Then the spot is established and thereafter doesn't move.

Good point.

The designated spot moved from where it was three years ago (almost 28 feet)?

Parlez-vous français?

Thanks.

Always listen to bob.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

The designated spot moved from where it was three years ago (almost 28 feet)?

MY games last about an hour, not three years.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Lets talk about my first paragraph (quoted above).

Is this not one very specific example of a "spot" being "moved" due to a timeout?

Player dribbling the ball requests and is granted timeout while deep in the frontcourt corner outside of the three point arc.

Won't the subsequent inbounds throwin be from the twenty eight foot mark on that side of the court?

Is this not one very specific example of "moving a spot" (in this case moving a spot almost twenty eight feet) "because of a timeout"?

No, no more than it would be "moving the spot" for a foul or violation. It's making the throw-in spots consistent, like they were before "marked spots".

Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

No, no more than it would be "moving the spot" for a foul or violation. It's making the throw-in spots consistent, like they were before "marked spots".

After forty-five plus years, I will admit that the spot didn't move, but it simply changed and almost twenty eight feet is a pretty big change (as I got a few questions about such by coaches and partners over the past two years).

Not the first time spots have changed. At one time wasn't the spot after a technical foul at the division line on either side of the court (can't remember how it was determined)?

Need a little help here Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

After forty-five plus years, I will admit that the spot didn't move, but it simply changed and almost twenty eight feet is a pretty big change (as I got a few questions about such by coaches and partners over the past two years).

Not the first time spots have changed. At one time wasn't the spot after a technical foul at the division line on either side of the court (can't remember how it was determined)?

Need a little help here Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

You keep talking about this spot moving (which it doesn't). The spot is established when play is stopped and where the ball was when play was stopped or the foul or violation took place. That spot is specifically established on the location of a foul or violation. You keep talking about something that moves 28 feet when we say anything outside of the 3-point line all those times, the throw-in goes to the 28 foot mark. It is that simple. If it is an out-of-bounds violation, it goes to where the ball is out of bounds. Who else is having this issue with this at this point?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

You keep talking about this spot moving (which it doesn't).

As I already clarified, in many (but not all) situations the designated spot has changed its position from a few years ago (from nearest spot to nearest of the eight marked spaces).

I called that change in position a "move" and others disagreed with my word choice.

Move: To cause something to go from position to another.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As I already clarified, in many (but not all) situations the designated spot has changed its position from a few years ago (from nearest spot to nearest of the eight marked spaces).

I called that change in position a "move" and others disagreed with my word choice.

Move: To cause something to go from position to another.

The closest spot was based on a different model. We do not use that model anymore. I do not get why this is so hard?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The closest spot was based on a different model. We do not use that model anymore.

That's what this entire thread and some upcoming NFHS (hopefully) clarifications are all about.

Of course I know that we are now using a new model.

I've been comparing what we used to do in the old model with the new model.

With the new model, some timeouts (i.e., immediately before, or during, a throwin), result in the original spot; other timeouts (requested and granted during player control clock running) result in nearest of the eight spots.

Just two choices.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

That's what this entire thread and some upcoming NFHS (hopefully) clarifications are all about.

Of course I know that we are now using a new model.

I've been comparing what we used to do in the old model with the new model.

With the new model, some timeouts (i.e., immediately before, or during, a throwin), result in the original spot; other timeouts (requested and granted during player control clock running) result in nearest of the eight spots.

Just two choices.

OK, so what is the problem? How is that confusing?

Peace

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

OK, so what is the problem?

Once it was pointed out to me the difference between a "change" and a "move" I became fully on board.

I fully understand the different timeout scenarios, but not so for many of my partners over the past two years, and some varsity guys I observed in state tournament games two years ago.

I'm still a little sketchy on throwin violations.

[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. :-)