concerned and curious

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

4. Blow the whistle immediately and call a throw-in violation on B1.

Which is the same as #3.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Which is the same as #3.

I didn't think so when I originally read it. There were several dribbles before the official called the violation and almost 3 seconds ran off the clock. The violation should be called when the illegal throw-in is released. That's what I was getting at. Sorry for any confusion.

[Adam]

I figured, but the official called it as soon as he recognized it; which is all we can ask.

[Jesse James]

Basically identical play happened in the Southern Illinois-Indiana game Sunday. SIU never gets OB status, but passes, and heads up court. Ted Hillary kills the play after a couple dribbles, and gives it back to SIU to inbound again.

Originally Posted by Jesse James

Basically identical play happened in the Southern Illinois-Indiana game Sunday. SIU never gets OB status, but passes, and heads up court. Ted Hillary kills the play after a couple dribbles, and gives it back to SIU to inbound again.

So in this case, Hillary was incorrect to give the ball back to SIU? From 9.2.2 Sit C above, it is a violation and the ball should go to Indiana right?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by PYRef

So in this case, Hillary was incorrect to give the ball back to SIU? From 9.2.2 Sit C above, it is a violation and the ball should go to Indiana right?

I don't know if the NCAA has the same case play. Before the FED issued a case play, there was a long discussion here about the right ruling. The options included (a) immediate violation, (b) wait 5 seconds then call a violation, (c) give the ball back.

[rainmaker]

Also, OP should note that this is not a "lane violation" but a "throw-in violation." Just a minor point.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I don't know if the NCAA has the same case play. Before the FED issued a case play, there was a long discussion here about the right ruling. The options included (a) immediate violation, (b) wait 5 seconds then call a violation, (c) give the ball back.

I'm guessing that the rationale for (b) is that the throw-in team has 5 seconds to accomplish the throw-in correctly. So if they miffed it, they could try again. Is that right, Bob?

Only clue they'd have that they'd miffed it would be that you're still counting. But of course they expect you to be counting the 10-sec backcourt count, so they probably wouldn't know. I can see why NFHS opted otherwise.

I call this differently depending on level: for HS games, it's a violation (per rule and case book play); for little kids I make 'em do it right (teaching moment).