My rules changes

Junker · #1 (**permalink**) Tue Jan 31, 2006, 01:49pm

I discussed this earlier in the year on another post, but since we're talking rules changes in a couple of other threads.... I'd like to see the penalty for not getting on the floor during a throw in changed to a violation so that this gets called. I see more and more, a player will throw the ball in and sit outside the playing surface waiting to enter when it will help them. Another I see is a player trowing the ball in and running the length of the baseline oob before entering the playing surface. I think both give a big advantage to the offensive team, but I do think that a T for this is too much of a penalty. I think I only know of one official who has called this T and that was after talking to the player at least twice. I just see this play much like the leaving the floor for unauthorized reasons violation that was changed for this year.

Camron Rust · #2 (**permalink**) Tue Jan 31, 2006, 04:50pm

I agree 100%. This should be a violation. It has the same benefit and has the same motivation as running OOB around a screen.

Adam · #3 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 01, 2006, 01:57am

Personally, it would be easier to call the T when he runs the baseline before coming in.
With regard to making it a violation, though. That's a tough one to determine, in practice. Do you give a set amount of time (such as three seconds) to get back in after release? How would you word the violation? "Immediately" is awfully subjective.

blindzebra · #4 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 01, 2006, 03:07am

I had it happen the other night and I'm thinking I have two choices ignore it or call the T, and I wanted to call it a violation, but I could not support it by rule...I passed on it.

One I'd like to add is team control during the throw-in. Just add the word inbounds to all the counting situations.

Junker · #5 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 01, 2006, 09:12am

I think if you wrote the rule to read that the player must go directly to the playing surface it would be pretty easy to administer. It's an official's judgement, much like whether or not a shot is a shot. Anybody here have some pull to get this considered?

ace · #6 (**permalink**) Wed Feb 01, 2006, 01:14pm

I've called it by rule, as a T once this season, becuase it was obviously blantant, and not only that when he did step inbounds it was for a 3 PT attempt. Had he not walked behind me to get there- probably wouldnt have had anything, but his intentions were clearly obvious and extremely unsporting.