New Throw In Spot ???

[mick]

Use 7-5-2(a); 7-2; 9-2-2

Good call.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by mick

Use 7-5-2(a); 7-2; 9-2-2

mick: Thanks.

Rule 9-2-2: Throw In Provisions: The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court from out-of-bounds so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched.

Rule 7-2-1: Causing The Ball To Go Out Of Bounds - Individual Player: The ball is caused to go out of bounds by the last player in bounds to touch it or be touched by it, unless the ball touches a player who is out of bounds prior to touching something out of bounds other than a player.

Rule 7-2-2: Causing The Ball To Go Out Of Bounds - Individual Player: If the ball is out of bounds because of touching or being touched by a player who is on or outside a boundary line, such player causes it to go out.

Rule 7-5-2 (a): Throw In, Resuming Play: Designated out-of-bounds spot throw-in nearest the violation: After any violation, as in 9-2 through 10 and 9-13, the official shall place the ball at the disposal of an opponent of the player who committed the violation for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation.

I can't find any casebook citations, even for a different situation that we see all the time, a throwin going out of bounds untouched. Are there any casebook citations?

[Scrapper1]

I believe that a season or two ago, someone here noticed that the penalty section in Rule 9 actually required the throw-in to return to the original spot, as your officials did in their game. When this was pointed out by enough people, the penalty section was changed to the way it was "supposed to be", which is how you explained it. A2 committed the violation, not A1, so the new throw-in will be from the spot of A2's violation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

I believe that a season or two ago, someone here noticed that the penalty section in Rule 9 actually required the throw-in to return to the original spot, as your officials did in their game. When this was pointed out by enough people, the penalty section was changed to the way it was "supposed to be", which is how you explained it. A2 committed the violation, not A1, so the new throw-in will be from the spot of A2's violation.

Yup, it's not a violation of R9-2-2. It's now a violation of (new) 9-3-2.

Btw, that was me that noticed that. Also btw, the penalty section wasn't changed. A new Article was added to R9-3. if you look at last year's rulebook, 9-3-3 was 9-3-2 and there were only 2 Articles in R9-3, not 3. See if you can find this change listed anywhere.

[Zoochy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Yup, it's not a violation of R9-2-2. It's now a violation of (new) 9-3-2.

Btw, that was me that noticed that. Also btw, the penalty section wasn't changed. A new Article was added to R9-3. if you look at last year's rulebook, 9-3-3 was 9-3-2 and there were only 2 Articles in R9-3, not 3. See if you can find this change listed anywhere.

Wait a minute JR.... See Where is the Throw-in?
I posted the question. Nevada noticed the same problem and brought it to the readers attention.
So, is your real name Al Gore?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Zoochy

Wait a minute JR.... See Where is the Throw-in?
I posted the question. Nevada noticed the same problem and brought it to the readers attention.
So, is your real name Al Gore?

Sigh.....reading is fundamental.

Go back and read my post #4 of the thread that you posted above. Then note that every answer that Nevada gave in his post #2 was incorrect.Then read Nevada's post #6. Note that Nevada by his own admission wasn't aware of the correct call cited in my post #4 and had been calling it wrong.

Stick Al Gore up your azz.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Stick Al Gore up your azz.

Best idea I've heard all week.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I can't find any casebook citations, even for a different situation that we see all the time, a throwin going out of bounds untouched. Are there any casebook citations?

You don't need a case book citation for this one; it's covered explicitly in the rule book. It's a violation of rule 9-2-2 and the listed PENALTY for Section 2, except for Article 10, states that the ball is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in at the original throw-in spot.