![]() |
|
|
|||
Quote:
The throw-in ending isn't germane to team A violating prior to the ball touching a player. |
|
|||
Quote:
BZ: When a throw-in, as in NFHS R7-S5-A7, is germane, more importantly, this is NOT a designated spot throw-in. NFHS R7-S6-A1 notes that NFHS R7-S5-A7 is an exception to only one player making the throw-in. NFHS R7-S5-A7 allows the following sceniaros: 1) All five (5) players from Team A are behind the endline. A1 passes the ball to A2, who passes the ball to A3, who passes the ball to A4, who passes the ball to A5, who passes the ball to A1 who then passes the ball to A3 who is standing inbounds. A1 released his pass to A3 before the five (5) second throw-in count expires. 2) A1 passes the ball to A2 who is behind the endline, after he passes the ball to A2 he steps inbounds. A2 sets the ball down on the floor behind the endline and steps inbounds. A3 then steps out-of-bounds, picks up the ball and passes the ball to A4 who is standing inbounds. A3 released his pass to A4 before the five (5) second throw-in count expires. 3) I could go on with more plays but I think you see my point, that this throw-in is not a designated throw-in and the rules allow the team who has the ball for the throw-in much latitude in making a legal throw-in. MTD, Sr.
__________________
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 Ohio High School Athletic Association Toledo, Ohio Last edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.; Thu Nov 01, 2007 at 07:37am. |
|
|||
Quote:
![]() |
|
|||
Quote:
This may again be one of those situations where may is an important word. Just because A may do those things doesn't mean those are the only two options... |
|
|||
Quote:
![]() Follow-up question: reading the question, I don't believe it would be a technical foul if B reached across and batted a pass from A1 to A2 who was also behind the end-line...interesting... |
|
|||
I vote for #2, and here is why:
1) I am going to issue an official warning to Team B. See NFHS R4-S47-A1, R9-S2-A11, Penalty 1. 2) I am going to charge B1 with a technical foul. See NFHS R10-S3-A6a. I can understands BITS logic for wanting to use: NFHS R4-S47-A1, R9-S2-A11, Penalty 3, because one could infer that even though no player from Team A was in physical possession of the ball, it was at Team A's disposal when B1 reached thru the boundary plane and picked up the ball. MTD, Sr.
__________________
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 Ohio High School Athletic Association Toledo, Ohio Last edited by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.; Fri Nov 02, 2007 at 11:17am. |
|
|||
Quote:
1). The ball was place on the floor by the official. 2). Team A place the ball on the floor. in both situations team b reach through and touched the ball. How can the same act have different interpretations on how to penalize?
__________________
truerookie |
|
|||
Quote:
I did not say there were two interpretations. I said that one could make the logical deduction that in this case the thrower could be considered in possession of the ball during a throw-in because the ball was at Team A's disposal for a throw-in. Both the NBCofUS&C and its successor organizations, the NFHS and the NCAA, have never made a ruling to my knowledge that defines this situation as a thrower being in possession of the ball while his team has the ball at its disposal. Therefore, it is a more logical to apply R9-S2-A11, Penalty 1 and NFHS R10-S3-A6a, than it is to use R9-S2-A11, Penalty 3, which requires the use of R10-S3-A11. The result is the same: team warning to Team B and a direct technical foul charged to B1. MTD, Sr.
__________________
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 Ohio High School Athletic Association Toledo, Ohio |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
If you ain't first, you're LAST!!! |
|
|||
Quote:
|
|
|||
If there were a teammate of A1 standing outside the boundary, and A1 put the ball down and stepped inbounds, and then A2 walked over and picked the ball up, would you call it a pass?
|
|
|||
Quote:
3. gives a team delay of game warning for interfering with the ball following a goal...4-47-3 This is my take on this #1 is not correct 9-2-10 The opponent of the thrower shall not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in boundry... Since there is no thrower this rule can't be applied. After reading the second situation submitted, I withdraw this statement and opt for the boundary plane warning based on the premise that a thrower does not have to be physically present to have a violation just as no thrower has to be physically present to have a 5 second violation. #2 is incorrect. It is not correct to assess a T because in 9-2-10 penalty 3 the touching/dislodging must be while thrower is in possession of the ball or while the a pass to a teammate is being made.
__________________
Los Angeles Ca "You can fool some of the people all of the time, all the people some of the time, but not all the people all of the time." - Abraham Lincoln Last edited by jer166; Wed Oct 31, 2007 at 01:07pm. |
![]() |
Bookmarks |
|
|