In MA. . .

[ChuckElias]

A couple weeks ago, we discussed this play. . .

A1 scores. While B1 is holding the ball OOB for the throw-in, B2 sets a screen very close to the endline. B3 runs OOB on the endline and goes around B2's screen, coming back inbounds on the other side of B2.

Is this a violation based on this year's rule change? We discussed it here: http://officialforum.com/thread/22209

I said yes. But at the MA interpreter's meeting this afternoon, I was outvoted. A couple people agreed with me, but the majority sided with JR. The thought was basically that since B3 is allowed to be OOB, we can't assume that he's doing anything illegal.

So what about a defender who goes OOB to go around a screen? It's an immediate violation and reset of the shot clock. Among ourselves, we sort of agreed that a good official wouldn't notice the defender being OOB if the offense was about to score or was going to have an open shot. In other words, a good official will not call the violation if it doesn't interfere with the offense's play.

[truerookie]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
A couple weeks ago, we discussed this play. . .

A1 scores. While B1 is holding the ball OOB for the throw-in, B2 sets a screen very close to the endline. B3 runs OOB on the endline and goes around B2's screen, coming back inbounds on the other side of B2.

Is this a violation based on this year's rule change? We discussed it here: http://officialforum.com/thread/22209

I said yes. But at the MA interpreter's meeting this afternoon, I was outvoted. A couple people agreed with me, but the majority sided with JR. The thought was basically that since B3 is allowed to be OOB, we can't assume that he's doing anything illegal.

So what about a defender who goes OOB to go around a screen? It's an immediate violation and reset of the shot clock. Among ourselves, we sort of agreed that a good official wouldn't notice the defender being OOB if the offense was about to score or was going to have an open shot. In other words, a good official will not call the violation if it doesn't interfere with the offense's play.

Chuck,
Thanks for going back to this subject. It really cleared the air for me on this one. The way I understand it, along as a teammates is administering a throw-in it is legal. Once, the ball is within the confines of the boundary line and any player goes OOB it is a violation.

[Nevadaref]

You can add one more vote to the other side of the tally. I happen to agree with JR too.
Thanks for bringing up this sitch and sharing it Chuck.

[rainmaker]

When we have our rules meeting in November here in Portland, Oregon, and hear the ruling from on high from Howard Mayo, I'll let you know how things will be called at the opposite end of the country. Maybe we'll set up a clinal variation or something.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by rainmaker
Maybe we'll set up a clinal variation or something.

That sounds like it might hurt. . .

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

That sounds like it might hurt. . .

Probably hurts as much as being on the wrong side of the argument.

But, it makes sense.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by M&M Guy

Probably hurts as much as being on the wrong side of the argument.

Hmmmmm......I thought you'd be used to that by now.

Go White Sox.

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Hmmmmm......I thought you'd be used to that by now.

Go White Sox.

Shut up.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by M&M Guy

Shut up.

[Dan_ref]

This thread needs more bickering.

[SeanFitzRef]

Just don't let Bossref hear/read it!!