Throwing the ball off the backboard - Page 2

rainmaker · #16 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 16, 2006, 01:16pm

Quote:

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Quote:

Originally posted by rainmaker

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Quote:

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Here's another play for my NFHS should make a clear ruling on this thread.

Strangely, the NFHS had a clear ruling on this. Then, they cahnged the case play to mkae it less clear (at least to me).

Agreed.

The following case play was altered in 2003-04:

2002-03 version:
4.15.4 SITUATION C: After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (a) against the opponent's backboard and catches the rebound; (b) against an official, immediately recovers the ball and dribbles again; or (c) against his/her own backboard, catches the rebound and dribbles again. RULING: A1 has violated in both (a) and (b). Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. In (c), the action is legal as a player's own backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds, but does not constitute a part of a dribble. (9-5)

2003-04 version (as well as the current version):
4.15.4 SITUATION C: After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (a) against the opponent's backboard and catches the rebound; (b) against an official, immediately recovers the ball and dribbles again; or (c) against his/her own backboard in an attempt to score (try), catches the rebound and dribbles again. RULING: A1 has violated in both (a) and (b). Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. In (c), the action is legal. Once the ball is released on the try, there is no player or team control, therefore, A1 can recover the rebound and begin a dribble.

I put the changes the NFHS made to this play in red.

It's more confusing because of the added words "in an attempt to score (try)".

Before, any throw off the backboard was legal. Now, perhaps, only a throw that's a try is legal. What do we do with a throw that's clearly not a try?

Seems clearer to me. Why does it confuse you?

I see your point. The rule's still basically the same, because we're supposed to interpret any throw off the backboard as a try. But that interp isn't explicitly stated, so it opens up the possibility that there could be a throw that wasn't a try.

Camron Rust · #17 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 16, 2006, 06:17pm

Quote:

Originally posted by rainmaker

Quote:

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Quote:

Originally posted by rainmaker

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref

Quote:

Originally posted by bob jenkins

Quote:

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Here's another play for my NFHS should make a clear ruling on this thread.

Strangely, the NFHS had a clear ruling on this. Then, they cahnged the case play to mkae it less clear (at least to me).

Agreed.

The following case play was altered in 2003-04:

2002-03 version:
4.15.4 SITUATION C: After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (a) against the opponent's backboard and catches the rebound; (b) against an official, immediately recovers the ball and dribbles again; or (c) against his/her own backboard, catches the rebound and dribbles again. RULING: A1 has violated in both (a) and (b). Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. In (c), the action is legal as a player's own backboard is treated the same as touching the floor inbounds, but does not constitute a part of a dribble. (9-5)

2003-04 version (as well as the current version):
4.15.4 SITUATION C: After dribbling and coming to a stop, A1 throws the ball: (a) against the opponent's backboard and catches the rebound; (b) against an official, immediately recovers the ball and dribbles again; or (c) against his/her own backboard in an attempt to score (try), catches the rebound and dribbles again. RULING: A1 has violated in both (a) and (b). Throwing the ball against the opponent's backboard or an official constitutes another dribble, provided A1 is first to touch the ball after it strikes the official or the board. In (c), the action is legal. Once the ball is released on the try, there is no player or team control, therefore, A1 can recover the rebound and begin a dribble.

I put the changes the NFHS made to this play in red.

It's more confusing because of the added words "in an attempt to score (try)".

Before, any throw off the backboard was legal. Now, perhaps, only a throw that's a try is legal. What do we do with a throw that's clearly not a try?

Seems clearer to me. Why does it confuse you?

I see your point. The rule's still basically the same, because we're supposed to interpret any throw off the backboard as a try. But that interp isn't explicitly stated, so it opens up the possibility that there could be a throw that wasn't a try.

With this change in the case play, this rules committee has essentially effected another unannounced rules change. This case play now seems to only allow for an attempt/try off the backboard to be a legal tactic...not just any throw like it has been for decades.

Jurassic Referee · #18 (**permalink**) Mon Jan 16, 2006, 07:12pm

Quote:

Originally posted by Camron Rust

[/B]

With this change in the case play, this rules committee has essentially effected another unannounced rules change. This case play now seems to only allow for an attempt/try off the backboard to be a legal tactic...not just any throw like it has been for decades. [/B][/QUOTE]Actually, decades ago there was a very explicit case play on this type of play. Maybe MTD Sr. still has it in his attic someplace- even though I think it was before he started officiating. The case play said that if a player threw the ball off the backboard and he then went and got it himself, without an opponent touching it or the ball touching the rim, then it was a straight judgement call by the official as to whether there was a pass or a try on the play. The FED removed that case play because of the judgement factor. There was simply too much inconsistency; you could show a sample play to 100 officials and 50 would call it a pass and the other 50 would call it a shot. The case play was removed and new language inserted to try and take some of the judgement out of the pass/try.