The fact that a player is allowed to be OOB in certain circumstances doesn't give him license to do whatever he wants while he's OOB. [/B][/QUOTE]Rules citation?

Any member of the team throwing in is authorized unconditionally to be OOB behind the endline during a throw-in after points are earned.

You'll need to supply a rule backing up your claim.

The problem with this will come when the person with possession of the ball sees what's happening, and fakes passing the ball to her teammate (to make it look good) just as you blow the whistle. Now you've got some explaining to do!

Why do you have to blow your whistle right away? Why not wait and see the play develop. If the player goes around the screen and becomes involved in the action, you know they gained an advatage and can call the violation. I really don't see this being that difficult of a judgement call, unless the interpretations decide it is entirely legal, in which case it will be legal and there will be no call.

I don't think I really need a rules citation for that, do I? If A2 is legally OOB along the endline and is about to receive the ball from A1 who is also OOB, are you going to withhold the whistle when he excessively swings his elbows at B1 to make space to receive the ball?

No, if A1 needs to create space to recieve the ball I'll probably have a whistle on B1 for being OOB on the throw-in, which he is not allowed to do unconditionally by rule.

Even if B1 is not OOB, this rule states unconditionally that a player may not swing an elbow. IOW there are (or should be) no other considerations, we merely have to observe the swing of an elbow.

The rule we are discussing only penalizes players being OOB for an unauthorized purpose. IOW we must first ask ourselves "is he otherwise permitted to be OOB?".

In your play A3 is authorized to be OOB because he is permitted to do so by rule.

Now, if the rewritten rule did supercede the throw-in rule then no team mate would be allowed OOB with the player thowing the ball in. The rule as presented does say we are to whistle the violation immeditely. Which means as soon as you see it which means as soon as A3 steps OOB he's violated. Regardless of the throw-in rules.

Yes, it is not unreasonable for the the offensive team to set screen's where other teammates can go around them legally. The screen's should be set high enough to prevent a teammate from going OOB.

As I see it, during the normal course of a game if a player goes OOB unauthorized I am going to call a violation. I think the intent and focus here is, we have enough space between the boundary lines on the court for players to make adjustments and stay inbounds.

Re: Re: Re: Re: It's just mucked up.
 

JR,
Well, of course, a player may legally go out of bounds to gain that intended legal right to receive and make an endline pass.
The new rule certainly *doesn't disallow* intended advantages. I figgered that went without saying.
mick

Yup, if you wanna supersede R's 9-2-2, 9-2-12 & 7-5-7 , you sureasheck are gonna need some rules citations to do so. There aren't any rules that I know of that sez that any teammate of the thrower <b>during</b> a non-spot throw-in can't go in and outa bounds as many times as he wants, or can't run up and down the same endline OOB as many times as he wants either. There are rules governing their behavior when it comes to taunting, fouling, and other <specific</b> things, but I'm not aware of any rule that sez they <b>can't</b> simply just be OOB at any time during the throw-in.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's just mucked up.
 

Thx for the clarification, Mick. I was a-misunderstanding you.

Comments on the 2005-06 Rules Revisions, Release Date: 5/10/05, NFHS website.

Remember, we aren't talking about not allowing anyone to no longer go OOB, but just what consitutes "unauthorized". Obviously, any member of the throw-in team is authorized to be OOB during a throw-in after a basket. However, this specific example of going around a screen is mentioned as unauthorized. Neither example says the other one doesn't apply. So, I guess I can also ask: what rule do you use to back up allowing a player to go OOB to avoid the screen?

Even though there have been multiple rules mentioned, the only one that applies to teammates being OOB on a throw-in is 7-5-7. The context of this rule is the throw-in after a made basket, and what is allowed. The purpose is to allow teammate(s) to be OOB to receive a pass (or fake receiving a pass, or jump up and down and yelling, "throw it here!!", whatever). However, using OOB to get around a screen is also specifically disallowed. The two are not mutually exclusive; they can both be in effect. Granted, they need to figure out how you call it if you can't determine the intent of the player - avoiding the screen or completing the throw-in play.

I guess what it boils down to realistically, unless it's obvious the player is just avoiding the screen, I will assume it's part of the OOB throw-in play.

Sorry, you (and also JR in his post above) missed my point. I was addressing only and specifically the fact that JR asked for a rules citation to back up my assertion that the player OOB can't do just anything he wants, simply b/c he's allowed to be in that situation. I don't need a citation to back up that assertion. There are restrictions on such a player, even tho they don't fall under the throw-in rules. That was my only point. He can't do just anything. What we're discussing is whether going around a screen falls under those restrictions or not.

How about R9-2-12? That one sez that no teammate of the thrower can legally be OOB during a <b>designated-spot</b> throw-in. If the FED had wanted this rule to apply to <b>all</b> throw-ins, they would have removed "designated-spot" from the language. They didn't. Ergo, it's legal for all teammates of the thrower to be OOB after a non-designated spot throw-in begins.

This is exactly right. The player is authorized to be OOB. The player is not authorized to go OOB to utilize a screen.

Which authorization supersedes?