>>b/c you gave him a smart*** answer<<

Can you show me the smart*** answer, because I don't see it.

Agree...legal touch inbounds and the throwin is over...no baseline run for any infraction that follows.

Tom, to be quite honest, I really don't give a damn what you think.

found the wording in the rule book
 

page 50
7-5 art. 7 -- ...After a goal or awarded goal as in 7-4-3, the team not credited with the score shall make the throw-in from the end of the court where the goal was made and from any point outside the end line. A tem retains this privilege if the soring team commits a violation or common foul (before the bonus is in effect) and the ensuing throw-in spot would have been on the end line. Any player of the team may make a direct throw-in or he/she may pass the ball along the end line to a teammate(s) outside the boundary line.


I looked in the case book and it doesnt cover any specif case where the pass was made and at almost the same time as the offense gains possesion there is a foul on the defense.

After seeing the childish way Dan has to continue with this in another thread I didn't think neither one of you cared.

Re: i said
 

He doesn't have to have possession. The throw-in ends when the ball is legally touched inbounds. Once the throw-in ends, the right to run the endline is gone if a violation or foul occurs.

Whointhehell are you to tell Dan, or anyone for that matter, that they can't be childish?

I really <b>don't</b> damn well care what you think, Tom. It ain't your job to tell me what I can post- ever. If you have a problem with a post of mine, then e-mail a complaint to a moderator. That's their job- not your's. I don't remember seeing a notice appointing you the board censor.

Jurassic, I'm OK with everything you are saying.

Jurassic, I'm OK with everything you are saying. [/B][/QUOTE]Cool, Tom. I may not agree with your posts sometimes either, but I sureashell respect your right to make them.

Cool, Tom. I may not agree with your posts sometimes either, but I sureashell respect your right to make them. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree with that too but we aren't talking about basketball posts. We are talking about comments that could offend someone. Anyway...the whole freedom of speech thing.

If I am reading this correctly "the ref" was right here too...Not any violation or foul that occurs inside the 3 point line and below the free-throw line extended consists of a throw in from the near point, but the ones inside the imaginary trapezoid (which is from the free throw line extended to the corner...will be on the baseline

[Edited by joseph2493 on Aug 5th, 2005 at 11:04 AM]

Oooooo, so close, but I'm afraid that's not the correct answer. Slappy, what will Joseph be taking home as a consolation prize?!?!

A dead parrot?

You can't return 'em.

But look at the plumage!! Lovely plumage, eh?

He's not dead, he's...stunned.

(...sniff) I can't believe the (...sniff...) love flowing around this place now. It's beautiful, man. My screen is so sparkling clean after wiping off my tears (...sniff, sniff...).

Ok, I'm over it. Now, there's already been discussions over the plays themselves, but there's one point that seemed kinda missing: where's Gen. Otis T. Whackenator? Why wasn't this guy given the T at the first hint of a complaint? Maybe my tolerance level is low compared to some for men's rec league games, but I think this guy used up all his "benefit of the doubt" points the second he made his comment. Any remarks made after that should've earned him a T. Even if this guy is more experienced than WeekendRef, there are 101 better ways to help him out rather than trying to show his "superiority" during the game. Let's even say Weekend was wrong on both plays. I still don't think that allows the "ref" to act the way he did. We wouldn't allow that behavior in a higher level game - whay would it be allowed here, ESPECIALLY from someone who should know better?