The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 08:42am
BMA BMA is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 32
Question

B-2 to is making a throw-in, after a score. Team-A puts on a press, A-2 intentional kicks the ball OOB, B-2 who is still OOB catches the ball.
Question: is the intentional kick called which keeps the ball with Team-B, or Team-A's ball because B-2 caught the ball still OOB.

My call: kick ball on A-2

If thats wrong I should be a soccer player because I kick that one.
__________________
BMA
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 08:49am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
This has to be a kicking violation. Once the ball is intentionally kicked, it becomes dead. So the touching OOB is irrelevant. Give the ball back to Team B for a throw-in.

If the throw-in will be made along the endline, then I think that B can still run the endline. Doesn't this fall under the new rule? (I haven't received my new book yet)

Chuck
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 08:55am
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,794
The Team B's throw-in ended when A2 touched the ball (in this case intentionally kicking it). When A2 intentionally kicked the ball, A2 committed a violation. The penalty for A2's violation is that Team B gets the ball for a designated spot throw-in at the boundary line closest to the spot of A2's violation.

The new rule about running the endline is applicable only if the foul or violation occured before the throw-in ended.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials
International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Ump. Assn.
Ohio High School Athletic Association
Toledo, Ohio
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 09:48am
Esteemed Participant
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Vancouver, WA
Posts: 4,775
Mr. DeNucci is wrong...the new rule says they may still run the baseline...case book 7.5.7 Situation A on pg 4 addresses this particular situation...

DJ
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 10:38am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,612
DJ is correct. The violation by A2 caused the throw-in to end. Therefore, B will still be able to run the endline. That's the whole reason for the change. After score by A, if A commits a foul or a violation on the ensuing throw-in, B retains the right to run the end line.

Basically, if the touching by A is a violation, then allow B to run the baseline. It would be no different if A2 stepped on the endline and touched the ball after B1 released it. A2's touch caused the violation and the end of the throw-in. B's ball, with privileges still in place.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 11:41am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The new rule about running the endline is applicable only if the foul or violation occured before the throw-in ended.
Mark, I see the logic of this answer. But since the new rule applies (I think) to both violations and fouls, what other violation could the defense commit that would still allow the inbounding team to run the endline? The only thing I can think of is reaching through the throw-in plane. Is this the only violation situation that is envisioned by this rule change?

Chuck

[Edited by ChuckElias on Oct 23rd, 2001 at 02:32 PM]
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 11:48am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 285
Quote:
Originally posted by ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The new rule about running the endline is applicable only if the foul or violation occured before the throw-in ended.
Mark, I see the logic of this answer. But since the new rule applies (I think) to both violations and fouls, what other violation could the defense commit that would still allow the inbounding team to run the endline? The only thing I can violation situation that is envisioned by this rule change?

Chuck
Off the top of my head,I can think of at least one violaton... defense reaching over the end line.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 12:51pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally posted by parkssa

Mark, I see the logic of this answer. But since the new rule applies (I think) to both violations and fouls, what other violation could the defense commit that would still allow the inbounding team to run the endline? The only thing I can violation situation that is envisioned by this rule change?

Chuck [/B]
Off the top of my head,I can think of at least one violaton... defense reaching over the end line. [/B][/QUOTE]


Now I am confused. The first time, it is a team warning, so inbounder could still run the baseline. The second time it is a T and that is something different.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 01:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 359
Send a message via AIM to Danvrapp
Quote:
Originally posted by RecRef
Quote:
Originally posted by parkssa

Mark, I see the logic of this answer. But since the new rule applies (I think) to both violations and fouls, what other violation could the defense commit that would still allow the inbounding team to run the endline? The only thing I can violation situation that is envisioned by this rule change?

Chuck
Off the top of my head,I can think of at least one violaton... defense reaching over the end line.



Now I am confused. The first time, it is a team warning, so inbounder could still run the baseline. The second time it is a T and that is something different.
[/QUOTE]

Right. First time - violation--and a warning--but team A can still run the line

Second time, all all times thereafter - violation--and a technical--and team A gets the ball for a spot throw in at the division line.
__________________
Dan R.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Tue Oct 23, 2001, 03:41pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 14,612
What RecRef is saying that with an initial violation of the throw-in plane, the rule was already in plac to allow the the thrower to run the endline. The rule change covers other violations by the defense, such as those that I identified above.
__________________
"...as cool as the other side of the pillow." - Stuart Scott

"You should never be proud of doing the right thing." - Dean Smith
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 24, 2001, 04:54pm
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,794
Quote:
Originally posted by rockyroad
Mr. DeNucci is wrong...the new rule says they may still run the baseline...case book 7.5.7 Situation A on pg 4 addresses this particular situation...

DJ
I am ashamed that I had forgotten about that new case book play. I understand the logic in the ruling, but it leaves my wondering why it is in direct conflict with the logic that the NFHS uses when one of the jumpers catches the ball before a jump ball ends.

If A1 (one of the two jumpers) takes player control of the ball before the jump ball ends, the NFHS ruling is that Team A has gained control for AP purposes and the AP arrow is set toward Team B's basket, and by A1 gaining player control in violation of the jump ball rule, Team B gets a throw-in nearest the spot of the violation by A1. I hope everybody can see where I am going with this.

In the case book play, Team B's throw-in ended when A1 touched the ball with his/her foot, A1 committed a floor violation by illegally kicking the ball. See how this logic is in line with the NFHS's jump ball violation above.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials
International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Ump. Assn.
Ohio High School Athletic Association
Toledo, Ohio
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Wed Oct 24, 2001, 05:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Quote:
Originally posted by rockyroad
the new rule says they may still run the baseline...case book 7.5.7 Situation A on pg 4 addresses this particular situation...

DJ
I am ashamed that I had forgotten about that new case book play. I understand the logic in the ruling, but it leaves my wondering why it is in direct conflict with the logic that the NFHS uses when one of the jumpers catches the ball before a jump ball ends.
Great call. NF should bring that interpretation into line with the NCAA interp.

Chuck
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 25, 2001, 10:14am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Just north of hell
Posts: 9,250
Send a message via AIM to Dan_ref
Just to continue kicking this one to death, if the throw
in had been off an alternating possesion situation then
the arrow gets changed when the kicking violation
occurs. Agree?
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 25, 2001, 12:26pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 521
Quote:
Originally posted by Mark Padgett

Snip

For example - there still is no definitive rule or case that clears up, without any room for challenge, whether or not the restrictions on a defender reaching over the line on a throw-in end when the ball is released toward the court by the inbounder or whether the defender must wait until the ball crosses the line. We have been discussing this for years and the rules committee still has not clarified this, except for interpretations from recognized interpreters and a former member of the NF rules committee. However, there is no agreement even among them. This is a fairly simple case in which to clarify a rule. [/B]
Maybe this should be in a new thread but I can think of how the rule could be any plainer in its meaning.

7-6-3 The opponent(s) of the thrower shall not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in plane until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass.

This is repeated in 9-2-11, which covers the penalty phase.

Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Thu Oct 25, 2001, 12:40pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Western Mass.
Posts: 9,104
Send a message via AIM to ChuckElias
[QUOTE]Originally posted by RecRef
Quote:

Maybe this should be in a new thread but I can think of how the rule could be any plainer in its meaning.

7-6-3 The opponent(s) of the thrower shall not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in plane until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass.
The rule you've quoted says it's ok for the defender to break the plane once the ball is released. It doesn't say that he may contact the ball, however. The provision above could simply be a recognition that the momentum of the player could carry him beyond the boundary.

On the other hand, 10-3-12 states that a player is charged with a technical foul if he should "reach through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touch. . .the ball". No mention is made of whether the touching occurs before or after the "thrower" has released the ball for the throw-in. It seems like it's saying that the defender my not touch the ball by reaching through the boundary-plane, period.

Now, that may not be a correct interpretation, but I think I've shown that it can reasonably be read a different way. So I agree with the point that it should be clarified.

Chuck
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:06am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1