Defender hits dribbler's hand; ball goes OOB; Whatcha got?
 

A1 is dribbling by the sideline. B1 reaches for the ball, doesn't hit the ball, but accidently hits A1's hand, which is in contact with the ball, and the ball goes out of bounds (without hitting anything else other than the floor). Call? Rules reference please?

Please consider 7-2, 7-3 and 4-24-2 in your answer.

I think the correct call by rule is Out of Bounds violation on A1. Am I missing something? BTW, I suspect most would say the ball was hit OOB by B1 and ignore the contact.

Thanks.

Who caused the ball to go OOB?

Rule 9-3-1.

As JR stated. The contact by B1 caused the ball to go OOB. Since hitting the hand which is in contact with the ball is the same as hitting the ball; B1 hit the ball OOBs.

However - was the ball last touched by A? :-)

In this particular play, it doesn't matter. I got into a very heated debate over this one time, and it ended up that I was wrong. Everyone (as far as I can tell) interprets the rules and cases in this sitch as oob off of B. You just have to go with it.

edited to correct. Thanks jdw

9-3-1...A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.

OOB off A or B?

There is no way to hit the hand and not hit the ball, OOB off of B1...that's my story and I'm sticking to it.;)

However, if we are to strictly adhere to that logic, what would we have when A1 is tied up in the corner and throws the ball at B1's legs and it goes oob off of B1? That would seem to be another case where A1 caused the ball to go oob but we would never give the ball to B in this case.

For the record, on the original situation I'm giving the ball back to A as I consider that to be the "right" call.

Per the OP, it touched nothing else but the floor.

I'm just giving information, actually, and am more interested in other responses than anything else. That said, the rebounding off of B1's leg is what caused the ball to go OOB, not A1's throwing of the ball.

Just like in the original post if B1 hits A1's hand while in contact with the ball causing the ball to go off A1's foot OOB, then it's B's ball...

In your stated case, IMO, B1 caused the ball to go out of bounds (off his/her legs). Again you are assuming A1 "intentionally" threw the ball at the legs of B1 rather than attempting a pass that "happened" to hit B1 in the legs. :D I believe the rules reference hitting someone in the face intentionally, but the legs are fair game... :p

Especially on dates. :D

I can't wait for Juulie's comment. :eek:

I'm glad you're too old and ugly to be of interest to my daughter!

the hand bone's connected to the wrist bone,
the wrist bone's connected to the arm bone,
the arm bone's connected to the elbow bone,
the elbow bone's connected to the upper arm bone,
the upper arm bone's connected to the shoulder bone, ........ etc.

ball off A OOB giver to B

I've seen his picture.

Let me see if I understand you. You are going to award B1 the ball for slapping A1s hand, resulting in the ball going OOBs? So if B1 had only hit the ball and not the hand, then its out on B1? Therefore you do not agree that the "hand" on the ball, is the same as the ball? That being said, you must call a foul each time the player, while shooting, gets their "hand" hit while in contact with the ball... correct?

Personally, I can't imagine seeing this play so well and so clearly that I could tell B1's hand didn't touch the ball.

By rule, it's B's ball. I'm just not good enough to make that call.

Snaqs,
What rule did I miss that makes it B's ball? Still refering to the original Op of B1 hitting A1s hand while in contact with the ball, the ball going OOB, touching nothing else but the floor. Thanks

My rule book is at home (I forgot to put it in my gamebag this morning), but let me ask this:

1. What does the rule actually say with regard to the hand on the ball? I don't believe it says the hand is considered "part of the ball." My memory tells me that such contact is to be considered "incidental."

2. If #1 is correct, then the player who "caused" the ball to go out of bounds is, by definition, the last person to touch the ball before it went there. By rule, the OP should be B's ball.

Again, though, even with my contact lenses in, I don't see well enough to make that call.

What you are seeing is the literal wording of the rules vs the real world.

The natural way to read 10-6-2 is to take it as the hand is part of the ball, unfortunately it isn't literally written that way...so officials are in a dilema...call it literally or call it fair.

Which is why you can read some of the responses like I don't see well enough to see only hand on hand, or it's impossible for B1 to just hit the hand and no ball.

So book ref it and give the ball to B or real world it and give it back to A.;)

Let me see if I can find it online... I thought it specifically mentioned "part of the ball". I was hoping JR or Nevada would post it for us by now.:)

even if "the hand is part of the ball" it is also a hand and that hand is attached to an arm as I so elequently stated before. Since it is still a hand and was last to touch the ball before going OOB - I am going to to award the ball to B unless B also hit the wrist/arm. Then I would whistle a foul on B and A would get the ball or FT.

10-6-2
 

A player shall not contact an opponent with his/her hand unless such contact is only with the opponent's hand while it is on the ball and is incidental to an attempt to play the ball.

Yea, that's been my concept in the past, also. But my supervisor and state rules interpreter specifically told me to call this as B causing the ball to go oob and give it back to A. Always. Everytime. Unless there's a foul. Then it's foul on B and give it to A. YMMV

4-24
Art. 2... It is legal use of hands to reach to block or slap the ball controlled by a dribbler or a player throwing for goal or a player holding it and accidentally hitting the hand of the opponent when it is in contact with the ball.

10-6
Art. 2... A player shall not contact an opponent with his/her hand unless such contact is only with the opponent's hand while it is on the ball and is incidental to any attempt to play the ball.

If B1's contact with A1's hand (while it is in contact with the ball) is accidental and during a legit shot to play the ball then by rule it is out of bounds on A.

7-2-1 ... The ball is caused to go out of bounds by the last player in bounds to touch it or be touched by it...

However, if B1 contacts A1's hand intentionally to cause the ball to go out of bounds then you have a personal foul, do you not?

Interesting, my thought process has always been that the contact by B1 caused the ball to go OOB, as if he hit ONLY the ball. Thus I would give it back to A1. Just as I deem contact by B1 on the hand of shooter A1 a legal play and play continues from resulting actions. Any chance there is a Sit on this particular instance?? I will look thru the books tonight. Thanks for the interps.

Here's a question ...... OP has A dribbling - would anyone change the way they would make the call if A was holding the ball after picking up their dribble?

Based on 4-24-2, there is no distinction. If it's incidental contact, then it's out on A. If it's intentional, the foul by B causes the ball to become dead before the ball goes out of bounds.

Wow! An example of where the literal reading of the rule doesn't match the accepted / intended interpretation. Who would think there would be such a thing?

Baseball has a saying: The rules were written by gentlemen, for gentlemen; not by lawyers, for lawyers.

It applies to basketball, too.

9-3-1
 

As JR pointed out days ago, this is the key. A player shall not cause the ball to go out of bounds.

Almost always, the last player to touch the ball/be touched by the ball is considered to be the one who caused it to go out. According to what I get out of the OP, that is not the case here. Violation on B1. A's ball.

I would agree with you, but Rule 7-2 defines what it means to "cause the ball to go out of bounds" and based on that, it's a still a violation on A.

In my JUDGEMENT, I got a foul on B1. ;). We play on from there.:D

And if you're dumb enough to book-ref it, don't complain about your future assignments.

File this away as the <b>expected</b> call.

Or not.......shrug.........jmo anyway.

Foul on B1, play on.....

Hitting the hand while in contact with the ball is not a FOUL. Why are you penalizing B1 for good defense? You can debate who it went OOB on, but not that it is a foul... imho.

Calling a foul on this play is a common tack, however this is by definition not a foul unless the player is deliberately attempting to hit the hand and not making a play for the ball.

The question is who has caused the ball to go OOB? Since it is legal to hit the hand of a player dribbling a ball, and in this case, the defender has not touched the ball, player A1 has caused the ball to go out of bounds, since he was the last to touch it.

In reality, I think most would say that it looked like B1 made contact with the ball and award possession back to A.

The defender is making a legal play and shouldn't be penalized for it, but it is probably also likely that it could seem as if something other than the hand has been struck, so a foul could legitimately be called, since plays are not situations, but happen in real time.

Thanks for your responses.

By a literal reading of the exact wording of the rule, this is OOB off of A, B's ball. But that is the wrong call. ;)