NFHS thrower problem

[Damian]

Last week, I had a spot throw in on the end line. After throwing the ball in, the thrower ran along the baseline out of bounds and came in the other side of the lane while the ball was being passed around the top to get probably back to him.

I immediately called a violation. This year, there was a rule change stating that a player that was legally out of bounds and did not return would be charged a technical. I knew the rule, but it just seemed too severe. So, I just called it using last years interpretation. Has this happened to anyone else?

[swkansasref33]

Originally Posted by Damian

This year, there was a rule change stating that a player that was legally out of bounds and did not return would be charged a technical. I knew the rule, but it just seemed too severe. So, I just called it using last years interpretation. Has this happened to anyone else?

Somehow, I must have missed seeing this rule change. I haven't ran into this situation yet, but I would probably have just called the violation. What rule is that?

[JRutledge]

The rule did not change, there was just a clarification. The rule was the same they just wanted to make sure people were not calling a violation for this act if the purpose was to delay coming onto the court.

Having said that on thing I am noticing recently with this post is that I am not hearing a lot of preventative officiating going on. Why not talk to the player? And was the player really trying to delay or just not aware of their surroundings as they run onto the court. If this is the first time you saw it, I would have a word with the player or the coach so you do not have to call anything. Preventative Officiating seems to becoming a lost art. You tell a player not to cross the line when they are defending the thrower? Why not do the same with something like this and no one but you even realized this was going on?

Peace

Originally Posted by Damian

Last week, I had a spot throw in on the end line. After throwing the ball in, the thrower ran along the baseline out of bounds and came in the other side of the lane while the ball was being passed around the top to get probably back to him.

I immediately called a violation. This year, there was a rule change stating that a player that was legally out of bounds and did not return would be charged a technical. I knew the rule, but it just seemed too severe. So, I just called it using last years interpretation. Has this happened to anyone else?

In 10.3.3 Situation A the official called the T after the player received the pass back NOT prior to.
I think the only way to tell if the act was to purposely &/or deceitfully delay return is to let the player receive the return pass... then whack 'em. if they delay return but don't get the ball back, do we really need that game interupter??

It's tough to call a technical or in your case of judgement a violation for something you said was "probable".

[jdw3018]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

In 10.3.3 Situation A the official called the T after the player received the pass back NOT prior to.
I think the only way to tell if the act was to purposely &/or deceitfully delay return is to let the player receive the return pass... then whack 'em. if they delay return but don't get the ball back, do we really need that game interupter??

It's tough to call a technical or in your case of judgement a violation for something you said was "probable".

Your point isn't bad, but I think there are many times an official could judge whether the delay was purposeful as part of a play even if he didn't receive the ball.

Originally Posted by jdw3018

Your point isn't bad, but I think there are many times an official could judge whether the delay was purposeful as part of a play even if he didn't receive the ball.

True, but I was just pointing out how the case book play relates to the same exact play the OP described.

[cmckenna]

And the change you were reffering to I believe was related to going out of bounds for an unauthorized reason. For instance, to get around a screen. If memory serves me (I am at work and no books) this was a T a couple years ago and then changed to a violation because no one was calling it.

[JRutledge]

You need to read the rules changes at the beginning of the rulebook this year. There was a clarification in 10-3-3 and I believe the clarification that a player cannot deceitfully delaying a return to the court. This was not about what took place in the past. That was a different issue.

Peace