Defense reaching through plane on throw in.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

What if the team has already received a delay of game warning. Will they be assessed an intentional foul and technical foul in this situation?

No. Intentional personal foul only.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Think of it this way....that's completely wrong.

You penalize it as per rule9-2PENALTIES(ART10)4. It's an intentional personal foul only.

Somewhere there's a FED ruling that was issued on that exact play.

Even after the first warning has already been recorded?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I've always treated the restraining line as a defacto boundary line, and have called an offensive throwin violation when A2 crosses it.

AAU? I'll move them off the scorer's table for the throwin, too.

This whole situation has never been precisely clear to me. It seems that there is a difference between the imposition of an imaginary line by the administering official and a physical restraining line painted on the court.

In the first case, the case book play clearly says that the inbounds space between the imaginary line and the OOB line can be legally used. In the second case the 1-2-2 along with reference to 7-6-4 make the case that this area is off limits until the ball has crossed over the restraining line.

So my question is should the two cases really be treated differently in practice?

[Nevadaref]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Think of it this way....that's completely wrong.

You penalize it as per rule9-2PENALTIES(ART10)4. It's an intentional personal foul only.

Somewhere there's a FED ruling that was issued on that exact play.

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Even after the first warning has already been recorded?

WOW, I can't believe that experience referees are still unclear on this.

JR is right. Contact with either the ball or the thrower on the OOB side of the plane constitutes a technical foul or an intentional foul AND a team warning if one has not been previously given. If there has already been a warning, then only the T or intentional foul is penalized.

10.3.11 SITUATION C: Team A scores near the end of the fourth quarter and is trailing by one point. B1 has the ball and is moving along the end line to make the throw-in. A2 steps out of bounds and fouls B1. Is the foul personal or technical? RULING: This is an intentional personal foul. The time remaining to be played or whether Team A had been previously warned for a delay-of-game situation is not a factor. If the team had not been warned, the foul constitutes the warning. (4-19-1; 9-2-11 Penalty 4)

10.3.11 Situation D: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1's hands. Earlier in the game, Team B had received a team warning for delay. RULING: Even though Team B had already been issued a warning for team delay, when B1 breaks the plane and subsequently contacts the ball in the thrower's hand, it is considered all the same act and the end result is penalized. A player technical foul is assessed to B1; two free throws and a division line throw-in for Team A will follow. The previous warning for team delay still applies with any subsequent team delay resulting in a team technical foul. (4-47; 9-2-10 Penalty 3; 10-1-10)

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Even after the first warning has already been recorded?

Yes. You penalize the complete act.

There are 3 different illegal acts by a defender on throw-ins:
1) Reaching through the plane without contact. The penalty is a warning the first time, followed by a "T" for subsequent occurrences. Rule 9-2PENALTIES(Art.10)1 & 2.
2) Reaching through the plane and contacting the ball. The penalty is a technical foul charged to the defender. Rule 9-2PENALTIES(Art.10)3.
3) Reaching through the plane and contacting the thrower.The penalty is a an intentional personal foul charged to the defender. Rule 9-2PENALTIES(Art.10)4.

Don't read anything into the play that isn't there.

The only exception(5 seconds or less remaining in the game) is listed in case book play 9.2.10.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

10.3.11 Situation D: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1's hands. Earlier in the game, Team B had received a team warning for delay. RULING: Even though Team B had already been issued a warning for team delay, when B1 breaks the plane and subsequently contacts the ball in the thrower's hand, it is considered all the same act and the end result is penalized. A player technical foul is assessed to B1; two free throws and a division line throw-in for Team A will follow. The previous warning for team delay still applies with any subsequent team delay resulting in a team technical foul. (4-47; 9-2-10 Penalty 3; 10-1-10)

That's the one that I was thinking of.

[M&M Guy]

Ok, I'm glad this is clear for Fed. As I admitted before, I wasn't entirely sure about the Fed. ruling, but I suppose I've gotten it confused with the NCAA-W ruling. I'm fairly certain if there has already been a warning recorded for a boundary plane infraction, the next time a player reaches through the plane, it is a T even if there is contact with the thrower. The other issues are the same - before a warning is issued, if a player reaches through and contacts the ball, it is a T, or contacts the thrower it is an intentional personal, and in both cases the foul also constitutes the first warning.

Just as a point of discussion, why would the Fed. consider the second reach-through and contact with the player an intentional personal, while ignoring the the action that happened first - reaching through the plane to get to that player? Before the warning is issued, they agree both actions are recognized - the warning for reaching through, and the end result (T for contact with the ball, intentional for contact with the player). What if the player trys to contact the thrower, misses, then fouls them on the second swing?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

1) Ok, I'm glad this is clear for Fed. As I admitted before, I wasn't entirely sure about the Fed. ruling, but I suppose I've gotten it confused with the NCAA-W ruling. I'm fairly certain if there has already been a warning recorded for a boundary plane infraction, the next time a player reaches through the plane, it is a T even if there is contact with the thrower.

2) Just as a point of discussion, why would the Fed. consider the second reach-through and contact with the player an intentional personal, while ignoring the the action that happened first - reaching through the plane to get to that player?

1) I think that's wrong too. Afaik, the NCAA Wimmens rulings are exactly the same as the FED rulings. See NCAA AR 83 and AR214(1).

2) As per the case book play cited above....10.3.11SitD...."It is considered all the same act and the end result is penalized." If the end result is contact on the thrower, call the intentional personal foul.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

1) I think that's wrong too. Afaik, the NCAA Wimmens rulings are exactly the same as the FED rulings. See NCAA AR 83 and AR214(1).

2) As per the case book play cited above....10.3.11SitD...."It is considered all the same act and the end result is penalized." If the end result is contact on the thrower, call the intentional personal foul.

Yep, I went back and read the in-season interps, and you are correct. The emphasis was on only issuing one penalty after the warning had been given, which I have no problem with. The example given was the same as the Fed. case play, where, after a warning to team A, A1 reaches through the boundary and contacts the ball, thereby resulting in only one T. My confusion was assuming the T was for the boundary infraction, not the contact on the ball. The next example was the contact on B1, which results in (only) the intentional.

I just bought some propane this past weekend, so I've got plenty to cook that damn crow I'm having for dinner tonight...

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I just bought some propane this past weekend, ...

Perhaps you are light-headed from the gas.

[isualum12]

Ok so here is a slight twist that I need your help with. Thrower is standing 3 feet off the line as I hand the ball into him. Defender is standing up almost on the line but not breaking it (yet). Thrower televised his pass that he was about to make across the key and defender starts to move along the baseline that direction. The ball is released from throwers hand. Defender reaches across the line (out of bounds) and slaps the ball down towards his own feet inbounds, gathers the ball and tweet. I blew my whistle and gave the team its first warning.

The coach argued later that because the ball was released out of the throwers hands it was ok. I still see the defender reaching across the line. (Of course the coach also argued that the ball was in play when touched by the defender, who knows maybe he did have a better look at it from center court then I did from the baseline 6 feet away.)

Still a illegal act even though the ball left the throwers hands correct?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by isualum12

Ok so here is a slight twist that I need your help with. Thrower is standing 3 feet off the line as I hand the ball into him. Defender is standing up almost on the line but not breaking it (yet). Thrower televised his pass that he was about to make across the key and defender starts to move along the baseline that direction. The ball is released from throwers hand. Defender reaches across the line (out of bounds) and slaps the ball down towards his own feet inbounds, gathers the ball and tweet. I blew my whistle and gave the team its first warning.

The coach argued later that because the ball was released out of the throwers hands it was ok. I still see the defender reaching across the line. (Of course the coach also argued that the ball was in play when touched by the defender, who knows maybe he did have a better look at it from center court then I did from the baseline 6 feet away.)

Still a illegal act even though the ball left the throwers hands correct?

If the pass was intended to go a teammate inbounds, the play was legal....once the ball is released on an intended throwin, the defense is free to defend it. However, if it was to a teammate who was (or was about to be) OOB in order to execute the throwin, it should have been a T.


RULE 9, SECTION 2 THROW-IN PROVISIONS
ART. 11. . . The opponent(s) of the thrower shall not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in boundary-line plane until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass.

RULE 10, SECTION 3 PLAYER TECHNICAL

A player shall not:

ART. 12 . . . Reach through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touch or dislodge the ball as in 9-2 Penalty 3.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by isualum12

Ok so here is a slight twist that I need your help with. Thrower is standing 3 feet off the line as I hand the ball into him. Defender is standing up almost on the line but not breaking it (yet). Thrower televised his pass that he was about to make across the key and defender starts to move along the baseline that direction. The ball is released from throwers hand. Defender reaches across the line (out of bounds) and slaps the ball down towards his own feet inbounds, gathers the ball and tweet. I blew my whistle and gave the team its first warning.

The coach argued later that because the ball was released out of the throwers hands it was ok. I still see the defender reaching across the line. (Of course the coach also argued that the ball was in play when touched by the defender, who knows maybe he did have a better look at it from center court then I did from the baseline 6 feet away.)

Still a illegal act even though the ball left the throwers hands correct?

Three clarifications:
1. There is a difference between the NCAA and the NFHS rules on this.
2. Was this a pass to an OOB teammate after a made goal and a time-out? Camron poses this scenario.
3. Was this a throw-in pass that was heading into the court?

Answers:
1. In the NCAA the defender can not reach across the plane until the ball breaks the OOB line. In NFHS the defender can reach across as soon as the throw-in pass is released from the thrower's hands.

2. If this was an OOB pass between teammates after the opponent scored, which likely it was not since you handed the ball to the thrower, then it is a technical foul for the defender to break the plane and contact the ball in both the NCAA and NFHS rule sets.

3. If this was a throw-in pass heading to an inbounds teammate, then your play was legal at the high school level (NFHS), but illegal at the college (NCAA) level. See #1.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by isualum12

Thrower televised his pass that he was about to make across the key and defender starts to move along the baseline that direction.

Easy. This is a technical foul for using television equipment during the game!!

In all seriousness, I think Camron provided you with an excellent answer.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

In all seriousness, I think Camron provided you with an excellent answer.

Oh sure, give him all the credit.