Player A1 has the ball above the key,while playerA2 is running the baseline to get open he/she steps out of bounds to avoid the screen and comes back in play to recieve a pass for a 3point shot which is good.

So my question is, knowing that it's a "T" on Player A2 for leaving the playing court by the rule book and I was the lead official and chose not to call a "T" on Player A2 for going out of bounds because I felt there was no advantage to it. Now if Player A2 miss the shot my guess was corect about the advantage/disadvantage no harm done plays continued on. Since PlayerA2 made the shot, now I felt I need to apply the rule in this situation. How do you make this call if your the lead official?

A) close game with less than a min. to play, do I apply the rule and "T" player2 and have the fans and coaches down my throat or let the play go?

B Call a out of bound Violation and reward team B the ball and explain to Team A why I called it out of bounds. And if team B coach knows the rule what if he ask "if its an out of bound violation" than why he did not recieved a "T" if that is clearly the rule for leaving the playing court.

I'm not calling a T on a player for just stepping OOB. If he goes OOB and runs down the length of the baseline, and receives a pass, that a different story. But just stepping out, no way.

But hey, what do I know, eh tomegun? :)

You're basing your whole thought process on a faulty assumption. The advantage that A2 is getting on this play is illegally going OOB to attain an <b>open,unguarded</b> shot. Whether the shot is actually made or not is irrelevant to the advantage that you are giving to team A. If A2 didn't go OOB, the defense may not have let him subsequently be in position to get the pass and then shoot.If you're gonna call the "T" in this sitch, you have to call it <b>when</b> A2 gets the pass after coming back in-bounds. That's a judgement call by you. Personally, depending on the score and time left, I'd call it if a made shot could be a factor in a team winning or losing the game. If there wasn't much of an advantage gained or the play didn't really impact the outcome, I'd probably just quietly warn A2 to stay in-bounds.

You can't call a violation instead just because you don't like the penalty for a player being illegally OOB. We don't get to make up the rules- we just decide whether we're gonna apply them or not in some situations.

Btw, if the fans or coaches are gonna be down your throat should <b>never</b> be a factor in deciding whether or not to make a call either.

But, hey, what do I know,eh Tomegun? :D

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Nov 18th, 2004 at 08:03 AM]

If A2 is slightly out of bounds,(I know you can't be slightly out of bounds. By using the term "slightly", I mean the player's intent was not to run out of bounds to go around the screen, they just happened to step out of bounds by mistake, a foot on the line or something similiar) then I let play continue without a penalty. However, if the player clearly runs out of bounds, using the out of bounds area to his/her advantage, then I call a T.

On a play like that, I have to make a judgement call as to what I think the players intent was. That is not always easy and I'm not right all of the time. However, I do my best and live with the out come. I don't worry about players, coaches, fans or what my sweet wife thinks. Officiating is a hard job. Most won't even attempt it. Of those who do, few stick with it.

Bama is right, meerly stepping OOB is nothing but running a few steps OOB is. Look at the situation and see what's happening. Say A1 has the ball and is trapped. Nobody can get open, A2 runs out of bounds and get open in the corner. A1 gives a ball fake to A2 which helps to free up A3 to receive a pass. True, A2 never got the ball but the advantage is clearly there and that's why I don't think you wait to long to see if an advantage is gained.

IMO, advantage gained= T. No advantage but runs a while OOB= violation.

Given that A2 is completely in-bounds when he gets the pass, under what rule are you going to call a violation, Chris?

You're right, but I'd judge more by the screen than by the actual player who goes oob. If B1 is very close to the boundary line, and A1 HAS to step out to get around, even if it's only just on the line, that's a T. If there's no screen, or the screen is under the basket, and A1 just sort of steps on the line without noticing, obviously that's not a T. Another example of "ref the defense".

http://www.officialforum.com/thread/16363

set aside some time for this one Bush...it is long..

I hope you'll reconsider the first part of what you've said. When layer A1 makes a reflexive dodge to get around the screen (no matter how close to the line it is), it shouldn't be a T. The purpose of this rule is to penalize deliberate use of the OOB space for an advantage...running out one door and coming back in the other one, going around the lead official. It is not meant to penalize normal reactions to plays on the floor that might result in being OOB. I assert that the T for being OOB is not intended to be used for a player who has a foot on the line, deliberately or not.

I should add that I don't mean to address the case where the player sees the screen well ahead of time and as the time to choose their path.

[Edited by Camron Rust on Nov 18th, 2004 at 03:19 PM]

I've seen how you like to get into it with others so don't even try it.

Exactly. When a coach says "what's the violation for?", what are you gonna tell him? And what rule are you going to cite to back up your reply?

I not sure I understand.... you *seem* to be making a distinction with a "screen ... under the basket"? where the screen is set on the court has no bearing, right? maybe I'm reading too much into your post...

I'm saying that if B1 (the screener) is well away from the endline, and A1 is running between the screener and the line and a small amount of his shoe touches the line, it's not "going oob to gain an illegal advantage." It's nothing. But if the screener is close enough to the line that the only way around is oob, then it's an illegal advangage, and should be called. And I'm disagreeing with Camron.