Team A taking the ball out on the sideline
A1 attempts to put the ball in play.
A2 and A3 sets a pick along the sidelines for A4
A4 is guarded very closely and briefly runs out of bounds to avoid the closely guarded B4 player and the ball is successfully passed into A4 back safely inbounds.

I watched this play 4 times and nothing was called. To me this is a violation having two offensive players out of bounds once the ball was put in play.

Then I got thinking, if this same play occurred after a made basket would it still be a violation? A rule citation would be helpful (NFHS)

thanks
Stew in Va
CVBOA

You are correct, it sounds like this should be a violation.

After a made basket, I'd say no violation, since the throwing team may have as many players out of bounds (up to 5 of course) as they'd like.

Violation. Rule 9-2-12 . . . No teammate of the thrower shall be out of bounds after a designated-spot throw-in begins.

Thanks for the quote and information- So on a throw in after a made basket the play would have been legal. Ok two years into this and I'm always asking questions- so much to know- so little time.
Glad I got this one right
Stew in VA
CVBOA

Yup. You got it.

Hey, if you stop asking, then you get yourself into trouble.

Why not a technical foul as per rule 10-3-3- <i>"A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason...."</i>. Isn't it a T under that rule as soon as soon as A4 steps OOB? Of course, isn't it also a violation under Rule 9-2-12 as soon as A4 steps OOB also? Which rule has precedent over the other, and why?

Discuss amongst yourselves. :D

Sigh. Stir that pot. . .

The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire. Discuss.

I'd go with the violation - it's more specific to this situation.

What? That's a legitimate question. Why would the rule that you cited take precedence over the rule I cited? And vice/versa?

Seriously!!

Why is it more "specific"? :confused:

Seriously? B/c the rule I cited deals specifically with the throw-in. If you were supposed to give a T for that infraction, 9-2-12 wouldn't need to be in the book.

Why is it more "specific"? :confused: [/B][/QUOTE]
See above. :)

Then why is 10-3-3 in the book?

See above. :) [/B][/QUOTE]See above.

To deal with non-throw-in situations, or intentionally deceitful situations (running out of the gym, through the hall and back in the other door).