Question on inbound play

[Quahogboy]

Hey all, this is my first post. I enjoy the site and have referred to it a few times the past couple of years.

I had a situation come up with my intramural girls team this morning that I need an opinion. My girls had just turned over the ball on the offensive end and turned to set up defense on our end. The other team was also going upcourt. The ref got the ball, tossed it to A1 out of bounds under the basket and then turned to jog up the court. A1 caught the ball, then as she was getting ready to throw it in to A2, dropped the ball which rolled off her leg then foot then rolled in bounds. A1 then crossed completely over the endline inbounds with both feet, picked up the ball, and threw it to A2 with both feet completely in bounds. I then called to the ref that she was inbounds and threw the ball to A2. The next dead ball he came to tell me that he didn't see the play and therefore couldn't make a call. I mentioned that he should have been watching the play and at the least should have been counting 5 seconds for the inbound but that I understood he missed it and to forget about it.

He told the other ref at the end of the quarter who then came up to explain to me that I was incorrect and that A1 was allowed to touch the line with her foot on the throw in. I kept trying to explain that A1 lost the ball, crossed completely inbounds and then threw the ball to her teammate while inbounds. All he told me was that had they seen it, they would have made A1 get back out of bounds to redo it. I think that if they had seen it that it would be a violation since A1 was the first person to touch the ball inbounds and she also crossed over the endline. On top of this, since she had a spot, she shouldn't have been able to move from there anyway. Can someone explain this better for me so I know what to say in the future? It actually happened to us later in the game where my player slapped the ball to initiate the play on the throw in and it slipped and rolled inbounds. She didn't chase it but the opposing side got it and ran the other way with it.

Thanks in advance.
Chris

[K-Bach]

Hi coach,

Without referencing any books, I believe you're describing a fumble by A1. In that case, the official will blow the play dead and re-administer the throw-in.

If she had stepped on to the court to complete the throw, there would have been a violation. Since she did not step in until the ball was fumbled, she did not commit a violation, until she actually threw the ball while still inbounds.

Welcome to the forum.

[tjones1]

For NFHS the references are in 9-2.

9-2-2
9-2-4
9-2-6

[Nevadaref]

Chris,
You are correct that the official should have been observing the thrower as well as counting five seconds. Additionally, you are probably correct about the rule. As far as I know in the NFHS rules if the player making the throw-in fumbles the ball away, there is no ruling that tells the official to readminister it.
There is such a ruling for a FT shooter, so the argument could be made to use the same philosophy.
FREE-THROWER LOSES BALL
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free throw line to attempt a free throw (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) accidentally drops the ball before the throwing motion is started. RULING: In (a) and (b) the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again.

Now in the NCAA rule book there is such direction.
7-6-5

A.R. 163.

A1, on a throw-in from a designated spot, fumbles. A1 leaves the designated spot to retrieve the fumble. Is this a violation? RULING: No. Since there was a fumble, the official shall blow his/her whistle, which causes the ball to become dead, and then shall re-administer the throw-in.

Strangely, on page 20 of the November 2006 issue of Referee Magazine the following Caseplay appears:
Fumbled Ball
Play: A1 has the ball at his or her disposal for (a) a designated-spot throw-in, or (b) a free-throw attempt, but A1 fumbles the ball, and it bounces serveral feet away such that A1 would have to leave the (a) designated-spot, or (b) free-throw semicircle in order to retrieve the ball. Shall a violation be called on A1 if he or she tries to retrieve the ball?
Ruling: When A1 loses possession of the ball in a manner such as presented in either scenario (a) or (b), the official shall immediately blow the whistle, which will cause the ball to become dead. The official should remind the player to use a little more caution next time (using a bit of humor in that scenario is acceptable), and shall again put the ball at the disposal of the player and begin a new throw-in or free-throw count, respectively (NFHS 7-6-2, 9-1-1, 9.1.1: NCAA 7-6-5 A.R. 18, 9-1-2a A.R. 1).

Until I see something in writing stating otherwise from the Federation, I don't agree that the RM caseplay is correct for NFHS rules, nor do I agree with it philosophically. Perhaps the NFHS issued an interpretation sometime in the past stating to do this. I don't know, but probably JR, Bob Jenkins, MTD, or someone else on this forum could provide that information.

[tjones1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Chris,
You are correct that the official should have been observing the thrower as well as counting five seconds. Additionally, you are probably correct about the rule. As far as I know in the NFHS rules if the player making the throw-in fumbles the ball away, there is no ruling that tells the official to readminister it.

What about 9-2-2.

It states: The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.

So are you saying a fumble is a direct pass? I'm a little confused. Set me straight...

[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 Quahogboy

The ref got the ball, tossed it to A1 out of bounds under the basket and then turned to jog up the court.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Chris,
You are correct that the official should have been observing the thrower as well as counting five seconds.

Yes, in addition, he shouldn't have tossed the ball to the player. He should have handed it to the player.

[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

Yes, in addition, he shouldn't have tossed the ball to the player. He should have handed it to the player.

It is recommended in the officials manual that the ball be handed to the thrower on the end line and bounced on the sideline, but it is not mandatory.

[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...

[jkjenning]

Originally Posted by Quahogboy

On top of this, since she had a spot, she shouldn't have been able to move from there anyway.

Something about your wording sounds like you might believe the feet have to remain planted during a spot throw-in. A "spot" throw-in only requires that the thrower keep one foot within a 3 foot wide area and that foot does not have to be on the floor - just within the plane of that 3 foot window - so this does give some latitude for movement; they just cannot take off and "run the baseline"... in all cases, the thrower can back up away from the court as far they wish.

[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.