Running out of bounds under the basket

CLAY · #1 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 04:59pm

I need some help. A rule in basketball is you can not run out of bounds to avoid a screen or 3 seconds.

I was watching a class AA regional basketball game last night when a team would set a screen under the basket. another offensive player would run around the screen and out of bounds a good 3-4 feet and return to the opposite cornor, then would receive the ball for a 3 pt shot. This happened 3 times (making 2 of 3) and the opposing coach was going crazy saying he could not do this. The officials called nothing. I thought you could not go out of bounds.

Clay

bob jenkins · #2 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 05:01pm

By rule, the play you describe is a Technical foul in HS ball.

JRutledge · #3 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 05:07pm

I hope next year they make this a violation just like the NCAA. Then it could be called much more. A Technical is much too harsh for this. No different than the elbow throwing T that was changed to a simple violation.

Peace

tjones1 · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 05:17pm

Quote:

Originally posted by JRutledge
I hope next year they make this a violation just like the NCAA. Then it could be called much more. A Technical is much too harsh for this. No different than the elbow throwing T that was changed to a simple violation.

Peace

Agree. Wondering though, how do you penalize the defense if they commit this infraction?

JRutledge · #5 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 05:29pm

Quote:

Originally posted by tjones1

Agree. Wondering though, how do you penalize the defense if they commit this infraction?

That is a good question. But I think the defense penalizes themselves by not being able to cover an offensive player. But having said that the rule was created for an offensive player so they do not go around screens by going out of bounds. I have never seen a defender go deliberately off the court.

Peace

Camron Rust · #6 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 05:46pm

Quote:

Originally posted by tjones1

Quote:

Originally posted by JRutledge
I hope next year they make this a violation just like the NCAA. Then it could be called much more. A Technical is much too harsh for this. No different than the elbow throwing T that was changed to a simple violation.

Peace

Agree. Wondering though, how do you penalize the defense if they commit this infraction?

Good question.

I think that 99% of the time, this is done by the offense...to get away from the defense.

It would be a rare occassion that a defender would get an advantage by running OOB unless he's following an opponent around who also ran OOB...but the call should go against the first violator.

If the defender's path is cut off late enough to leave OOB as the better route and he chooses not to run into the illegal screen (no time/distance), the offense has gained the advantage by forcing him to go OOB rather than direct so a no call would be acceptable. If the defender's path is cut off in time with a good screen, then the offense has achieve the desired result by pulling the defender off the cutter.

tjones1 · #7 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 06:01pm

Quote:

Originally posted by JRutledge

Quote:

Originally posted by tjones1

Agree. Wondering though, how do you penalize the defense if they commit this infraction?

That is a good question. But I think the defense penalizes themselves by not being able to cover an offensive player. But having said that the rule was created for an offensive player so they do not go around screens by going out of bounds. I have never seen a defender go deliberately off the court.

Peace

I also agree with Camron. I think the same could be said about the excessive elbows -- it's mainly an offensive violation. Bob, JRut, Camron, or Chuck (I don't mean to leave anyone out, I just know these guys usually answer the NCAA questions), as JRut stated, it's a violation in the NCAA, what's their penalty for the defense committing this?

BktBallRef · #8 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 07:08pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Camron Rust

If the defender's path is cut off late enough to leave OOB as the better route and he chooses not to run into the illegal screen (no time/distance), the offense has gained the advantage by forcing him to go OOB rather than direct so a no call would be acceptable. If the defender's path is cut off in time with a good screen, then the offense has achieve the desired result by pulling the defender off the cutter.

Unless I'm mistaken, in the NBA, it was illegal at one time to set a screen that would forced the defender to go OOB. Not sure if that rule still exists.

refnrev · #9 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 07:22pm

Rut is right. This needs to be a violation rather than a T. I've seen it once or twice, but didn't call it because it wasn't a habit. I did have a partner call it once -- against common sense in my opinion -- with a couple of minutes left in a blow out game. The fans and coach went crazy and I actually had to have a fan (my neighbor who lives three doors down from me) ejected because he wouldn't get off of my partner for the call. T is pretty severe for this offense.

rgaudreau · #10 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 08:47pm

Quote:

Originally posted by refnrev
Rut is right. This needs to be a violation rather than a T.

But the question about penalizing the defense remains...

It would be a great way for the defense to stop the clock in an end of game situation. Just run around out of bounds till the ref blows his whistle.

Ren

QuebecRef87 · #11 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 10:00pm

Quote:

Originally posted by rgaudreau

Quote:

Originally posted by refnrev
Rut is right. This needs to be a violation rather than a T.

But the question about penalizing the defense remains...

It would be a great way for the defense to stop the clock in an end of game situation. Just run around out of bounds till the ref blows his whistle.

Ren

We could just use common sense: if we judge the defense gained no advantage over the offense, or, that the offense would be disadvantaged by a play stoppage, then no call. Otherwise, well, violation?

refnrev · #12 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 10:15pm

Tanner,
Maybe I'm just having a little brain freeze here, but why would the defender want to go out of bounds? I can't picture many scenarios that this would give a defender much of an advantage. I'll bet most post pleyers would love to have their defender out of bounds when they go up for a shot. If they're out of bounds they aren't in legal guarding position. They can't steal the ball. It seems to me that they just penalized themselves.
BT

tjones1 · #13 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 10:36pm

Quote:

Originally posted by refnrev
Tanner,
Maybe I'm just having a little brain freeze here, but why would the defender want to go out of bounds? I can't picture many scenarios that this would give a defender much of an advantage. I'll bet most post pleyers would love to have their defender out of bounds when they go up for a shot. If they're out of bounds they aren't in legal guarding position. They can't steal the ball. It seems to me that they just penalized themselves.
BT

To a point I agree. How about avoiding a screen?

refnrev · #14 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 10:47pm

OK work with me now. I'm trying to get this picture. Why would the screener set the screen on the baseline? And if he did, why wouldn't the defender go top side to get around it?

tjones1 · #15 (**permalink**) Wed Mar 02, 2005, 10:53pm

Quote:

Originally posted by refnrev
OK work with me now. I'm trying to get this picture. Why would the screener set the screen on the baseline? And if he did, why wouldn't the defender go top side to get around it?

Well my first thought we be looking at a screen occuring in the paint or near the paint and there being a lot of traffic. Therefore, take the easier route to get around that mess and go OOB to avoid all the traffic.