Toss the ball to A1 for a throw-in under B's basket. He holds the ball for a couple of seconds, then drops the ball. It hits the top of his foot, bounces out to B1 who grabs it and lays it in. In the few seconds that go by, while I am standing there thinking, I notice A-team coach is saying nothing. I figure if I wave off the basket, B-team coach will go nuts. Since everyone is happy, I let the basket count and tell A1 who is looking at me, "Well, are you gonna throw it in?"

Did I kick this?

Good "no call" based on your description. The inbounds pass from A1 was perfectly legal. B1 essentially stole the inbounds pass.

good no call. which brings up another ?. Spot throwin, ball fumbles out of the hands of the player who has the throwin after he clearly secures it from the official. ball rolls 10' beyond his 3' spot, still OOB. Can he go get the ball, come back to the spot and throw the ball IB as long as it does not take over 5 sec.?

I disagree that the original situation is a legal play. I think we have a throw-in violation on A for not releasing the ball "so that the pass goes directly into the playing court." (NCAA Rule 7-6.3.)

On the second situation, this will lead to a violation, either for the same reason, or beacuse the player has to leave the spot. (NCAA Rule 7-6.4: Until the thrown-in ball crosses the plane of the sideline or end line:
a . The thrower-in shall not leave the designated spot.)

I once read where a wise official said that if you don't know a rule violated, then don't make a call.

So, you did right that day...

BUT, by the book, that was not a pass in-bounds, that was a fumble, blow the whistle, give the ball back to A1 with a warning (if it happens again, violation). Remember, the alleged "pass" hit a player OOB before going into the court.

Try Case 9.1 SITUATION.

You fella are making to much of this.
 

Whether A1 fumbled the ball or passed it is of no concern to an official. Had the ball hit his foot and then it the floor OOB, he could have retrieved it, as long as he didn't violate the spot requirement. But that's not what happened. The ball entered the playing floor, where it is free for anyone to gain possession.

As far as any NCAA rule goes, I'm pretty sure that Larry officiates under NF rules. But the fact of the matter is, the thrower did not violate the requirement that the ball be passed directly onto the playing floor. That rule is to prevent a player from throwing the ball off a wall or other obstruction behind him. It doesn't mean that he can't bounce the ball off his own foot.

As far as 9.1 goes, 9.1 applies to a FT, not a throw-in. With a FT, no one would be allowed go into the lane and retrieve the ball. Therefore, you blow the whistle and give the shooter one more opportunity not to screw it up.

Re: You fella are making to much of this.
 

9.1 shows a Case where a clear opportunity to violate a rule is whistled dead; the situations are VERY similar.

Regardless, if the ball hits his foot, then the "pass" did not go directly into the court, it was bounced OOB (the player's foot is OOB); that is a violation.

If you are saying the pass originated at his foot, then that doesn't work either, intentional play off a foot is a kick.

If you got away with it you did good on the no call. I would have done the same.

What if the player throwing the ball in, bounced it off his head like a soccer player? Would that be legal?

RookieDude

IMO, no, it hit a player OOB; also, the play off the head is not a pass, the rules imply that a pass is made using the hands alone.

Isn't making much of little what officiating is all about?
 

I'm afraid that I must disagree again. I remember going over a situation with our interpreter that is similar to this. Suppose A1 makes a throw-in that bounces on the sideline before A2 catches. The interpreter says that this is a violation, since the pass was not directly onto the playing court.

Isn't making much of little what officiating is all about? :D
 

I'm afraid that I must disagree again. I remember going over a situation with our interpreter that is similar to this. Suppose A1 makes a throw-in that bounces on the sideline before A2 catches. The interpreter says that this is a violation, since the pass was not directly onto the playing court.

Sounds like the consesus here is I should pray this never happens again :).

I see the arguement that the pass did not go directly into the floor and that makes sense. I'm afraid that I would have to disagree with calling a kicked ball violation. I remember reading somewhere that it had to be intentional. That was certainly not the case. With a day to think about it, I came to the following conclusion, since the only cases I can find seem to address intentionally throwing to ball off something being a violation. If the ball bounds to a teammate in a press situation who immediately breaks the press and is on his way for a lay-up, I would not stop the play; therefore both teams should be given the same consideration. At least until I can have a definitive interpertaion from my association of find a rule.

Of course, I could always side with the loudest howler monkey :D (tongue planted firmly in cheek)

Larry, just a question. Why did you "toss the ball" to the player for the throw-in. We are supposed to "hand the ball"-frontcourt, or "bounce the ball"-backcourt to the thrower around here.

I bounced it to the player. Sorry if I was confusing with "tossed".

If you are wondering if the player had control of the ball (an assumption on my part based on your question), in this case A1 definetly had control of the ball. If he would have fumbled it off his foot, I would have stopped everything for a "do-over" figuring I, at least partially, may have contributed to the fumble.

The first time the ball touched the floor was about 6 feet inbounds if that would factor into anyone's thoughts.

What surprised me is there was not even an uproar from the experts in the stands. That may indicate they thought I got it right or had no clue.

Wait a minute...their fans...they had no clue.