ncaa consistently ignored rule

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Jimgolf

In order for the player to be the first to touch the ball after returning from out of bounds, the ball must be passed while the player is out of bounds. Otherwise, the player is not the first to touch it inbounds, since the passer is still touching it and is inbounds.

Where may I find that interpretation in the NCAA rule book?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Where may I find that interpretation in the NCAA rule book?

This is exactly what has made this rule so confusing to understand. I don't think it's written very cleary when the pass is consider to be the first pass. In my example above, did I get it right or not?

[Jurassic Referee]

Here's how to call the play, already laid out for everybody.....

NCAA Rule 9-4AR181:
Team A sets a double screen for A1, who, in attempting to come across the free-throw lane is legally obstructed by offensive and defensive players so that A1 leaves the playing court under the basket, circles around, returns to the playing court and then is the first to receive the ball.
RULING A violation has been committed by A1 for leaving the playing court and then becoming the first player to touch the ball upon return.

Note that there is no provision that the ball must be passed while the player is OOB.

Also note that NCAA rule 9-4-1 applies on all endlines and sidelines to any player that leaves under their own volition, i.e. willingly.

And rule 9-4-1(a) as previously cited in this thread is only an exception related to offensive players being legally OOB on their endline after a made basket or FT by the other team. That they can come back in-bounds and receive the throw-in is all R9-4-1(a) is telling you.

That's my understanding of how everything is to be interpreted.

[Adam]

To me, if the ball is in the hands of another player when A1 comes back in bounds, then A1 cannot possibly be the first to touch the ball by definition. To happen, the pass would have to be released prior to A1 establishing position inbounds.
Now, if that's not how it's called, fine. But even the interpretation, as worded, states it this way. Without defining "first to touch" differently, I'm left with my view.

[Nevadaref]

Adam,
JR just cited the A.R. which defines it for you. Your understanding is not correct per the rules.

The NCAA put something out a few years ago that said what bigwhistle wrote in post #6 (A1 to A2 to A3), but I can't recall where that was written--perhaps in an A.R., perhaps it was a bulletin.

Anyway bigwhistle's OP is completely correct. This rule is being completely ignored to the point of why even have it. I've seen numerous examples of it being broken, including a play in the NCAA tournament last year by UCLA.

Hank Nichols needs to take a look at this and provide clear direction or scrap the rule.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This rule is being completely ignored to the point of why even have it. I've seen numerous examples of it being broken, including a play in the NCAA tournament last year by UCLA.

I've called it this year, but only once.

[sseltser]

I'm a little confused.

Someone please tell me what is correct in these situations:

1. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A1 releases the ball on a pass, then A2 legally establishes position inbounds, then is the first player to touch. Easy violation.

2. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A2 legally establishes position in bounds, then A1 (who is the first to touch after A2 is inbounds) releases the ball. A2 is the next to touch. Is this a violation?

3. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A2 legally establishes position in bounds, then A1 dribbles the ball once, then passes to A2, who is the next to touch. Is this a violation?

I guess my biggest question is this: Wouldn't the first player to touch the ball be the player holding onto the ball when A2 becomes an inbounds player?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by sseltser

I'm a little confused.

Someone please tell me what is correct in these situations:

1. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A1 releases the ball on a pass, then A2 legally establishes position inbounds, then is the first player to touch. Easy violation.

2. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A2 legally establishes position in bounds, then A1 (who is the first to touch after A2 is inbounds) releases the ball. A2 is the next to touch. Is this a violation?

3. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A2 legally establishes position in bounds, then A1 dribbles the ball once, then passes to A2, who is the next to touch. Is this a violation?

I guess my biggest question is this: Wouldn't the first player to touch the ball be the player holding onto the ball when A2 becomes an inbounds player?

IMO, the NCAA means "next" when they say "first." All of the above would be (by rule) violations.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by sseltser

I'm a little confused.

Someone please tell me what is correct in these situations:

1. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A1 releases the ball on a pass, then A2 legally establishes position inbounds, then is the first player to touch. Easy violation.

2. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A2 legally establishes position in bounds, then A1 (who is the first to touch after A2 is inbounds) releases the ball. A2 is the next to touch. Is this a violation?

3. A1 is holding the ball when A2 is out of bounds. A2 legally establishes position in bounds, then A1 dribbles the ball once, then passes to A2, who is the next to touch. Is this a violation?

I guess my biggest question is this: Wouldn't the first player to touch the ball be the player holding onto the ball when A2 becomes an inbounds player?

Bob Jenkins is correct all of these are violations under NCAA rules. The player who already has the ball while his teammate is out of bounds doesn't count. Another player must touch the ball in between for the play to be legal. However, as we have said, this violation is routinely being ignored at the D1 level.

[sseltser]

I understand that it is ignored and that all those plays are violations, but the rule says it is a violation for being the "first player to touch the ball after returning to the playing court."
Whereas part of the A.R. says "is the first to receive the ball."
These have different meanings and should be called in different ways. The play that I mentioned earlier (Play 2 in my post) should not be a violation according to the wording of the rule. There needs to be a stipulation such as "next player" or "second player" or "besides the player who is in control of the ball when the player returns to the court." I know that the people who write the rulebook aren't supposed to be English majors, but I don't think this make sense.

From a competition stand point, why not make it a violation for a player to just leave the floor like NFHS. Let's suppose the player goes out of bounds to make a screen work more effectively so the other team has to switch. The offense then dumps it into the post player who now has a mismatch and they gain an advantage even without the guy who went out of bounds touching the ball. It also makes it much easier to call and takes the guesswork and confusion out of it.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by sseltser

From a competition stand point, why not make it a violation for a player to just leave the floor like NFHS. Let's suppose the player goes out of bounds to make a screen work more effectively so the other team has to switch. The offense then dumps it into the post player who now has a mismatch and they gain an advantage even without the guy who went out of bounds touching the ball. It also makes it much easier to call and takes the guesswork and confusion out of it.

Why would they want to do that? The rule is fine the way it is. The problem is you have people that think everyone should call the game as closely as they would while watching TV. If they were as good as the official working the actual games, then they would be there. I have not seen this called at the HS level as closely as those claim they are doing. No one is complaining. The only people making an issue are a bunch of "rulebook" officials who would not know a real game if it hit them in the face.

BTW, coaches make these rules. Officials have almost nothing to do with what rules the NCAA creates.

Peace