Penalty for unauthorized leaving floor

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Dribbler just barely steps on the out of bounds boundary. Did he violate? Yup. Is it really a big deal? Yes. Boundary lines are a big deal.

Why? Let's say the player is in the backcourt and there is no pressure. The same conditions as for the palming violation that you would ignore.

Seriously why do you make a big deal out of having a toe on this line and not worry about having one on the FT line while attempting a FT? (Or substitute: a toe on the lane line for more than 3 seconds or barely touching inbounds during a throw-in (or not fully being OOB however one views it) or running the end line in the fc while on offense without the ball and putting half of a foot OOB).

What makes an OOB violation by a player with the ball so much more important in your mind than any other violation?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Seriously why do you make a big deal out of having a toe on this line and not worry about having one on the FT line while attempting a FT?

Because boundary lines are a big deal.

I told you that I'm unable to change your mind if you think they're arbitrary. I can only tell you that it works for me.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Because boundary lines are a big deal.

You still haven't said WHY "boundary lines are a big deal."

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

You still haven't said WHY "boundary lines are a big deal."

Perhaps you don't understand what I mean by "arbitrary".

They just ARE a big deal. If you disagree, I can't convince you otherwise. But I am sure that they are a big deal.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

They just ARE a big deal. If you disagree, I can't convince you otherwise. But I am sure that they are a big deal.

Did someone tell you that or did you just arrive at this conclusion on your own?

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Did someone tell you that or did you just arrive at this conclusion on your own?

Bob Jenkins made me say it.

Are you saying that you would ignore an out of bounds violation if you deemed it to be "minor"? IOW, you disagree that boundary lines are a big deal? Or are you just uncomfortable with my lack of rationale? Or is something else going on that I'm missing?

[Nevadaref]

I've expressed no reasoning for my questioning in this thread and you haven't articulated any reasoning for your expressed opinions in this thread.

[chartrusepengui]

palming the ball is really a judgement of exactly where the official sees or doesn't see the hand to ball relationship at any given moment. It is ever changing. However - the lines on the floor are static - they don't change. I think that is why they are such a big deal. I might let the carry go - but would whistle the boundry line violation.

To those that would not whistle the boundry line - what about a backcourt violation where player A was not being pressured. He was backing up calling a play and his heel was on the division line? Since there was no pressure or ball advancement do you decide not to call that?