Question on inbound play

[Nevadaref]

If thrower A1 fakes an inbounds pass, but in doing so the ball slips from his grasp and flies inbounds where B1 catches it and scores a basket, would you cancel the goal and readminister the throw-in stating that it was not a direct pass inbounds?


PS You know what the penalty for that call is right?

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If thrower A1 fakes an inbounds pass, but in doing so the ball slips from his grasp and flies inbounds where B1 catches it and scores a basket, would you cancel the goal and readminister the throw-in stating that it was not a direct pass inbounds?


PS You know what the penalty for that call is right?

No, but it's still a pass that came from the player's hands, unlike it rolling off the player's leg.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by tjones1

No, but it's still a pass that came from the player's hands, unlike it rolling off the player's leg.

Is it? Does it meet the definition in 4-31? Why doesn't a ball rolling off a player's leg qualify? (assume that the ball does not bounce on the floor OOB before entering the court)

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Is it? Does it meet the definition in 4-31? Why doesn't a ball rolling off a player's leg qualify? (assume that the ball does not bounce on the floor OOB before entering the court)

?? Good question. I agree there were two violations in this case. The second one occurred from missing the first i.e. a ball inbounds touched by the thrower before it touched another player.

[rainmaker]

Just to put another voice into this discussion, I'll respond to the OP sitch rather than the definition of a pass issue.

The covering official definitely should have been watching. What A1 did is definitely a violation.

It seems to me that the Referee Magazine case play is highly questionable, but perhaps that's what the explaining official is referring to.

How old are the players in your case? I know that at the middle school level and lower, a lot of refs are pretty lackadaisical about the inbounds play when there's no defense. There's also a lot of new refs who are getting their start at these levels. I'm impressed with how you handled it, since a lot of coaches in intramural at all levels seem to feel that their next coaching assignment will be to be Bobby Knight's assistant, and they want everyone to know that they're qualified, if you catch my drift.

At the lower levels, I might do what the RM case play suggests, namely to blow it dead and give A1 a do-over. And if I'd done it for A1, I'd have done it for your player, too. But if I know or suspect that the teams have two or three years experience under their belts, I'm inclined to call this sort of thing, but that's just me.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

At the lower levels, I might do what the RM case play suggests, namely to blow it dead and give A1 a do-over. And if I'd done it for A1, I'd have done it for your player, too. But if I know or suspect that the teams have two or three years experience under their belts, I'm inclined to call this sort of thing, but that's just me.

However, the RM case play and the NCAA ruling seem to take the reverse approach. They both insist that the official blow it dead and redo the throw-in for these players at the higher levels. So based upon that logic why would you hold lower level players, who are clearly more mistake prone, to a tougher standard?

Afterall, if it's a redo in the NCAA Championship game, why isn't it a redo in a MS game? Huh, smart gal...

[Quahogboy]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

How old are the players in your case? I know that at the middle school level and lower, a lot of refs are pretty lackadaisical about the inbounds play when there's no defense. There's also a lot of new refs who are getting their start at these levels. I'm impressed with how you handled it, since a lot of coaches in intramural at all levels seem to feel that their next coaching assignment will be to be Bobby Knight's assistant, and they want everyone to know that they're qualified, if you catch my drift.

At the lower levels, I might do what the RM case play suggests, namely to blow it dead and give A1 a do-over. And if I'd done it for A1, I'd have done it for your player, too. But if I know or suspect that the teams have two or three years experience under their belts, I'm inclined to call this sort of thing, but that's just me.

Well these are High School and Junior High girls. It's intramural Church league so it's mainly for kids that want to play but don't have much in ability to make their school's varsity. There are some teams that are still pretty good. I know enough about the rules to know when something doesn't look right but can't quote the section and paragraph without looking it up. Makes it difficult to prove my argument with a ref so I don't normally push it too far. I try to make sure my girls have a lot of fun and win or lose, that they go out with their heads high. However, we try our best to win and the refs are spotty in this league. There are some good ones and some not so good ones. After the first quarter I can usually tell the difference. I understand the difficulty reffing high school games, esp. girls intramurals where you could literally stop the action with violations every 10 seconds.

I probably have it in me to do a Bobby Knight but I don't let that happen. I will question the refs and get an explanation as to why they called/didn't call something against my team. I don't think I will change their minds but if I feel they're consistently getting it way wrong, I am hoping that it will cause them to be more observant on whatever the situation is (ie: watching the inbounds passes and 5 sec count).

In the end, the other team was shooting a 20 footer at the buzzer to win against us, and I could hear the smack at the other end where my guard missed the ball and left a red handprint on the other girl's arm. No call from the ref. Do I feel that it should have been called? Yes, but I guess it was my turn to get the call. We won by 1 point. Would I have been upset with a foul called in that situation? Not at all. But I saw it as just another call that should have been made that for some reason was left in the refs pocket. This week it benefited us. Next week it might not. It's what comes with playing in this league.