Throw in questions!

[eg-italy]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

By general interp, in 1) if the ball continues inbounds (that is, lands farther away from the endline), then it hit the bottom and not the back. Legal play. If the ball bounces back toward the endline, even if it lands inbounds, then it hit the back of the backboard and is OOB.

Same interp in 2), assuming B1 was between the backboard and the endline.

Is this really a general interpretation?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by eg-italy

Is this really a general interpretation?

It's not really an interpretation, it's physics.

A ball that hits the backboard that comes back towards the same side of the board as the thrower can only do so if it hits the surface that is facing the thrower.

Likewise, a ball that doesn't come back to the side of the board from which it was thrown can not have hit the surface that is facing the thrower.

So a ball thrown from anywhere behind the backboard that stays behind the backboard can only have hit the back of the backboard. And, a ball thrown from behind the backboard that does not stay behind the backboard must not have hit the back.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by eg-italy

Is this really a general interpretation?

Yes. The NFHS rulesmakers issued something to this effect years ago, advising officials to use the same criteria that Bob posted.