Throw in

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Whistles & Stripes

If it's tied up long enough to warrant a whistle, since B1 is IB and A1 is still OOB, it's B's ball.

Um, no. Not even close. RFP had it right.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Um, no. Not even close. RFP had it right.

Without citations, I have no clue which of you is right.

[Raymond]

6.4.5 sitB would be the citation for the OP's question.

(and look, I answered that question with plenty of time to spare for MNF)

The extra-added benefit would be if this question is on tonight's test.

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Without citations, I have no clue which of you is right.

I hope you know which one is right.

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Dan_ref

I hope you know which one is right.

Yea, it's a pretty safe bet that anything W&S says, isn't going to go in my direction, I'm taking the other one. Wow, did I say that out loud?

[Dan_ref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Yea, it's a pretty safe bet that anything W&S says, isn't going to go in my direction, I'm taking the other one. Wow, did I say that out loud?

Dunno. Do you speak the words as you type them?

[Nevadaref]

This play was considered for a rule change by the NFHS committee back in 2004. It failed. Here was the proposal:

Change the interpretation from a held ball to a ball out of bounds by the player who holds the ball beyond a boundary line an opponent grasps the ball while it is still in the bands of the thrower-in by making the following changes. Following Note in 9-2-11, change "See penalty" to See Penalty 5." There is no penalty specified for this note. Add Penalty 5: If the opponent touches the ball there is no penalty and the clock is not started if stopped. If an opponent grasps the ball, the ball shall be declared out-of-bounds o the player throwing in the ball. The ruling of casebook play 7.6.3F on page 56 would change to: "The ball is awarded to Team B for a throw-in. If the throw-in is an alternating possession throw-in, the arrow would be reversed." Rationale: In all instances in which a player is in possession of the ball and is touching a boundary line the ball is considered to be out-of-bounds by that player. If a held ball were to occur when two players were in-bounds but one of the players was touching a boundary line, the ball would be considered to be out-of-bounds by that player. This situation is also similar to the clarification made in 1994 in which a player, whose is making a throw-in, throws the ball to an opponent who is touching the boundary line. Changing this interpretation would be consistent with Rule 7 Section 1 Art. 2a, which states, "The ball is out-of-bounds when it touches a player who is out-of-bounds." Also it would reward the defensive player for making a good play and penalize the player making the throw-in for making a dumb play. This interpretation would agree with the NCAA interpretation of this play.

BTW, can anyone verify if that last sentence is incorrect?