Testing all officials!!!

A1 inbounding the ball in the front court, B1 in front of A1 but not breaking the plain. A1 frustrated that he/she can't get the ball by the outstreched arms of B1, A1 reaches out and with one hand moves the arm of B1 and throws the ball in to A2. What do we have boys?

Hmmm
 

Unsportsmanlike conduct???? Technical Foul possible. Good question.

Intentional personal foul.

Re: Hmmm
 

Technical foul for illegal contact during a <b>live</b> ball? :confused:

Re: Re: Hmmm
 

I was shooting in the dark, not sure...I was looking through the rule book too. If you have a rule, please share!

Sounds like a plain old common foul to me. Live ball...no player control on a throw-in. Just a plain old foul on A1.

Z

No team control either on throw in, so spot out of bounds closest to the foul, Right or they could shot if they are in the bonus??

Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
 

Rule 4-19-1&3.

It meets the rules definition of both a personal foul and an intentional personal foul. I went with the intentional because of the language "neutralizes an opponent's obvious advantageous position". It was a deliberate act used to gain an unfair advantage. I wouldn't really protest if it was called a regular personal foul though. It meets that definition also.

Yep.

Z

Personal foul on A1. Shoot the bonus if necessary.

If it is an intentional personal foul for B1 to reach through the plane and contact the thrower-in, the same penalty should exist for the reverse case.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
 

JR:

You are sounding a lot like me. I guess it is going to be 80F tomorrow here in Toledo.

MTD, Sr.

Way to go Jurassic, Yes it is an Intentional Personal Foul

But this situation is more analogous to the thrower extending the ball through the plane and being fouled on his arm on the inbounds side of the plane by a defender.

The ruling on that play is a common foul because the contact occurs on the inbounds side of the boundary plane.

The contact on the play under discussion in this thread also occurs on the inbounds side of the boundary plane.

I believe that another aspect of the play is more important than the spacial location of the foul. I think it's necessary to rule on A1's intent. Clearly A1's actions are intentional by trying to thwart an opponent's obvious advantageous position: playing good inbound defense.

Edit: post editted at Nevada's request. Sorry about the mixup!

[Edited by JugglingReferee on Jan 23rd, 2006 at 10:51 PM]