Available for your Disposal

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Camron:

For BZ's sake you had better clarify your first point above, I think that you and I would both agree that when A1 picks up the ball two feet from the endline, the official should wait to see if A1 is just going to stand there and waste time or does he immediately move to take the ball out-of-bounds to attempt a throw-in. If it is the former, then the ball can be considered at the disposal of Team A for a throw-in, the ball is now live, and a five second count can be started, meaning that if Team B now makes a request for a timeout it will not be granted. But if it is the latter, then the ball does not become at the disposal of Team A for a throw-in, the ball does not become live, and the five second count should not start until A1 is out-of-bounds and no part of him is touching inbounds; until this happens if Team B makes a request for a timeout, it should be granted.

MTD, Sr.

Let's break down how illogical that is, shall we.

If the throwing team does what, by rule, they are supposed to do, secure the ball and move to the endline, you WILL allow the other team to call a time out.

If they don't do what they are, by rule, supposed to do, you WILL NOT allow a time out for the other team.

Do you realize just how unfair and idiotic that sounds.

Do what you are supposed to do and get penalized.

Don't do what you are supposed to do and the OTHER team gets penalized.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by blindzebra
Let's break down how illogical that is, shall we.

If the throwing team does what, by rule, they are supposed to do, secure the ball and move to the endline, you WILL allow the other team to call a time out.

If they don't do what they are, by rule, supposed to do, you WILL NOT allow a time out for the other team.

Do you realize just how unfair and idiotic that sounds.

Do what you are supposed to do and get penalized.

Don't do what you are supposed to do and the OTHER team gets penalized.

When we start (or don't start) the count, we don't know that A wants a TO. So, we can't consider A in this scenario -- we can only consider B.

If B is delaying, starting the count penalizes B -- it minimizes the delay.

If B is not delaying, not starting the count advantages B -- it gives them the full 5 seconds from the time they get ready to make the throw-in.

I think you earlier said something to the effect of "If B gets the ball two feet from the end-line, I'll start my count, but if they get it at half court (with no penalty / warning involved), I'll wait until they get OOB." If you did say something to that effect, I'd like to ask exactly where the dividing line is -- 5 feet? 10 feet? the FT line?

And, if you wait when B picks up the ball at the division line, why don't you start the count when they get to within whatever that arbitrary distance is?



[Edited by bob jenkins on Nov 12th, 2004 at 04:50 PM]

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

When we start the count, we don't know that A wants a TO. All we know is that B is delaying. So, starting the count penalizes B -- it minimizes the delay.

It still penalizes A when there is NOT a delay, now doesn't it? The rule says to wait a moment or two before you begin a count to see if B is delaying or is just confused, so there should be a GREATER opportunity for A to call a timeout in this situation, not less as MTD suggests.

It still comes down to this, there is no rule that says disposal is ball OOB after a made basket.

MTD is flat out wrong about this, and so is anyone who agrees with him.

[Edited by blindzebra on Nov 12th, 2004 at 05:05 PM]

[blindzebra]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

When we start (or don't start) the count, we don't know that A wants a TO. So, we can't consider A in this scenario -- we can only consider B.

If B is delaying, starting the count penalizes B -- it minimizes the delay.

If B is not delaying, not starting the count advantages B -- it gives them the full 5 seconds from the time they get ready to make the throw-in.

I think you earlier said something to the effect of "If B gets the ball two feet from the end-line, I'll start my count, but if they get it at half court (with no penalty / warning involved), I'll wait until they get OOB." If you did say something to that effect, I'd like to ask exactly where the dividing line is -- 5 feet? 10 feet? the FT line?

And, if you wait when B picks up the ball at the division line, why don't you start the count when they get to within whatever that arbitrary distance is?



[Edited by bob jenkins on Nov 12th, 2004 at 04:50 PM]

I NEVER said any such thing about OOB. I said earlier that if the ball gets away on it's own or delects off the throwing team you can either wait until they are in position to throw it in, or hit the whistle and treat it like a spot throw in with the ability to run the end line.

It's called common sense and judgement WITHIN the rules. Saying it must be OOB is adding something that is NOT IN THE RULES.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

When we start (or don't start) the count, we don't know that A wants a TO. So, we can't consider A in this scenario -- we can only consider B.

[/B]

Agree. But we also have to then make the determination of whether B actually had possession of the ball or the ball at it's disposal if A does subsequently request a TO. Getting away from all of the mind-numbing verbiage that been used so far (including my own), the original question was what was the point in time that you would NOT allow a TO request from the scoring team. If I'm interpreting the rules correctly( and I think I am), on a normal situation- not including the ones where the ball bounces away- you can't honor that TO request if it's made after a player from the team scored on grabs the ball after the made shot even if it's preparatory to going OOB to make the throw-in, or you alternatively determine that that team has met the rules language of having the ball at it's disposal. Iow, if a B player grabs the ball to take it OOB, then a subsequent TO request by A will be denied- even though the B player is still inbounds.

That was the original scenario. Do you agree with that, Bob, or do you have any rules reference that would say otherwise?