Going OOB Question...
 

A1 dribbles down the middle of the lane where he passes off. He goes out of bounds while the ball is live and in his team's possession. Not forced out. I'd say he's not out for an authorized reason and I have called a turnover on A. Wanting to make sure I'm correct on this and would like to know your situations where/when you wouldn't make this call. Thanks.

Can't answer based on you description of play..
 

1. Was he going down the lane hard where his momentum took him out of bounds?

2. Was there an advantage caused by his going out of bounds?

If it was momentum that took him out of bounds I would probably have nothing. If he went out of bound around a pick and got the ball back I probrobably would call it. Although I have seen someone leave the court for unauthorized reasons (stepping on end line while cutting I have called it on only a couple of occasions where the player gained an advantage).

I'm letting this one go; momentum is an authorized reason. You going to consider saving a ball an unauthorized reason if they weren't forced out.

BITS gets out his stir stick
 

I'm going to bring this up again to see if the brain trust's thoughs on this have changed at all. Both BamaRef and I have brought this up before and found ourselves outside the majority opinion.

We have a school in our region that runs a set play where a player will run toward the baseline, leap out of bounds, and pass off to an open teammate across the key while in the air out of bounds. This play was recently discussed in our association meeting, and he and I just kind of smiled to each other and waited to see what the outcome would be.

I'm inferring from NevadaRef's posted response he believes the OP's situation is a violation. Would it be any less of a violation if the person leaving the floor were anywhere other than in the paint before leaving the floor?

Sounds like a dangerous play anyway. If that pass gets covered, there's not much of a plan B. I'm not calling it.

Dangerous in a couple of ways. I was at this school last week, and they ran it 3-4 times, in a small gym with close walls.

I didn't call a violation. But I still feel this play doesn't square with what I perceive are the Fed's intentions of ensuring that game is played within the boundaries of the court.

BTW, If the formerly omnipresent Chuck Elias happens to read this, I would like to see this play submitted as a potential case play to the NFHS.

Yes, I believe that the OP's sitch is a violation.

I believe that your play is legal.

Just my opinions.

Gee, I would certainly hope not. There's no rule being violated.:)

For what? Maybe we're seeing different plays. I'm seeing a kid driving the lane, realizing he's deeper than he intended, passing the ball and his momentum takes him OOB. Are you calling 3 seconds? I can see that, but not for going OOB for an unauthorized reason.

Adam,
I was picturing the player making the pass and then leaving the floor NOT due to momentum, but by choice.

If it was momentum, I agree with you.

My judgement was that he had plenty of opportunity to stop and change directions. I don't believe momentum was a factor in this sitch. I do understand where such M would be a factor. I didn't think it was in this time.
Going out of bounds coud have been avoided. Thanks for your thoughts.

This brings up in my mind, does the player have to actively avoid going OOB to avoid the violation? If a player is dribbling towards an OOB line, in almost any case, they could stop their dribble and stay inbounds, if they choose. But, if they keep their dribble, then pass it as they are going OOB, would it automatically be a violation, even if their momentum carried them OOB after they passed the ball, and then the player returned to the court without a delay?

According to the Case Book, this is NOT a violation.

7.1.1 SITUATION C: A1 blocks a pass near the sideline and the ball goes into A1's front court. A1's momentum carries him/her out of bounds. He/she immediately returns inbounds, secures control of the ball, dribbles, shoots, and scores. RULING: Legal. (4-35-1a; 7-1-2; 9-3)

At what point should he have turned? They have the entire playing court to use at full speed if they desire; are you saying he should have done so in a manner that would have controlled his momentum better? Are you saying that in BITS example of the drawn play that you'd call the violation?

There is a fine line here. In all the published cases we have, the momentum exists because a player was trying to get to the ball....to save it or intercept it. In other words, they were drawn to the location.

In the hypotheticial case we're talking about here, that is not the case. In this situation, A1 plans to head OOB and use that to his/her advantage.

At best, it seems like a grey area.

I agree with you on this Cam. (It would be nice to have a rule with more parameters on this issue.)

Here's another rule they need to do away with. Intentionally running OOB is a violation. In the set play by the team, the player did not run OOB intentionally, it is apart of the play and I don't need to hear no more about the play. The only reason you even mention it is because you know it is a design play. You are the official refereeing the game. Do that and get your nose out of the coaches playbook. As far as the rest of us is concerned, it's legal.

I really think this is a bad rule. It puts us on the spot. Close game, final play of the game, 4 seconds left, inbound at half court. A1 runs around the screen, runs OOB, comes back around and receives pass. You gonna make that call? The majority of us is not going to make that call if we value working in that gym again. Game deciding play, I'm going to let the players decide the game.

I agree wholehearteldy with Old School on this play and the call or no-call dealing with this play...wholeheartedly, I tell you!!

(That's two...one more and my debt is paid!)

Disagree completely. The vast majority of officials in both high school and college games <b>will</b> make the <b>correct</b> call.

The high school officials will make the correct call because they all own and read the NFHS case book. And NFHS case book play 9.3.2SitB tells them exactly how the play should be called. It's basically the same play as posted above.


College officials will also make the correct call because they own and read the NCAA rule book. And rule 9-4-1AR181 tells them exactly how the play should be called. It's the same play also as posted above.

Both sets of officials also know that they had <b>better</b> make the correct call too. They have assignors and evaluators to answer to. If they <b>don't</b> make the correct call, they just might not be seeing the floor in future games.

Rec League Ronnies who don't own rule books and also lack balls will follow Old School's lead, and rationalize it off by saying that they want to let the players decide the game. Unfortunately, <b>they</b> will decide the game by not calling the violation and screwing the defensive team.

Iow, as usual, ignore the advice(?) above.

You might be hospitalized though after doing so.

The humanity, the humanity....:eek:

One of the top ten posts ever on this board.

When is calling a violation not letting a team play? Should I let them walk to the basket too cause I don't like to call traveling?

We are just enforcers of the rules. They play by the rules.