Fouling an inbounder who is not a thrower?

[refnjoe]

From Rule 4:

SECTION 42 THROW-IN, THROWER, DESIGNATED SPOT
ART. 1 . . . The thrower is the player who attempts to make a throw-in.
ART. 2 . . . A throw-in is a method of putting the ball in play from out of bounds


Hmm, interesting question. When I look at the above, it seems to me-

1) The throw in has not ended
2) The player is attempting to put the ball in play from out of bounds
3) By definition, that player is now a thrower

So I would say, the language backs up your conclusion quite nicely.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by refnjoe

From Rule 4:

SECTION 42 THROW-IN, THROWER, DESIGNATED SPOT
ART. 1 . . . The thrower is the player who attempts to make a throw-in.
ART. 2 . . . A throw-in is a method of putting the ball in play from out of bounds


Hmm, interesting question. When I look at the above, it seems to me-

1) The throw in has not ended
2) The player is attempting to put the ball in play from out of bounds
3) By definition, that player is now a thrower

So I would say, the language backs up your conclusion quite nicely.

I disagree with #2, which is why I posed the question. My unwritten assertion was that the player being fouled does not meet the definition of a "thrower." The argument against this would be that the "throw-in" includes all action between the ball being at the disposal of the thrower and the ball being "in play." The argument against that would be that, if that were the intent of the definition of 4-42-1, it should instead read something to the effect of "The thrower is the player who participates in the throw-in by being legally out of bounds."

[refnjoe]

Ah, I see what you are saying now. My thinking was that the question was about the 2nd OOB player who was receiving the pass.

Does it make sense to say, that B2, by passing to B3 who is going to throw the ball in, is still a part of the throw-in (i.e. attempting to put the ball inbounds)?

Regardless, good food for thought!