Screen on an inbounds pass...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

1) What!?!?! So you're saying it would be a violation for A2 to run out of bounds during a throw-in to go around a screen set by A3? He's not part of the throw-in in that situation, so by your rationale, it should be a violation.

2) But when the rule changed from a technical foul to a violation for voluntarily running out of bounds, you (and a lot of other folks) argued that A2 had NOT committed a violation in that situation, precisely because he's allowed to be out of bounds during a throw-in anywhere along the endline.

3) If you stand by what you said then, it seems to me you can't say that the screener with one foot out of bounds during the non-designated spot throw-in is doing anything illegal. Being out of bounds is never unauthorized in that situation.

Um, yup, I sureasheck am saying that. That's case book play 9.3.3SitB. It doesn't differentiate between it happening during a throw-in or the ball already being in play. Both situations can happen during a live ball and in both cases a player is gaining an illegal advantage during the live ball.

2) There's a difference between a player legally leaving the court on an unrestricted endline throw-in by his team and a player illegally leaving the court to gain an advantage not meant by rule. They're completely different situations. Would you say that the same screen and OOB play would also be legal if a team ran it on a sideline?

3) See #2.

Apples and oranges imo. There's a big difference between teammates going OOB during a throw-in to participate in that throw-in and teammates setting screens while being OOB.

[Johnny Ringo]

Player leaves the playing floor on his own ... violation? If so, could this not be considered that?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

Player leaves the playing floor on his own ... violation? If so, could this not be considered that?

No, because it's an endline throwin. All offensive teammates are allowed to step out of bounds.

[Johnny Ringo]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, because it's an endline throwin. All offensive teammates are allowed to step out of bounds.

OK ... now what if it was during the normal course of play? How do you deal with a player running out of bounds?

[Adam]

It's a violation.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Johnny Ringo

What if it was during the normal course of play? How do you deal with a player running out of bounds?

9.3.2 Situation A: A1 receives a pass while in the restricted area of the lane. A1 passes the ball to A2 outside the three-point line. In order to get the three-second count stopped, A1 steps directly out of bounds under A's basket. Ruling: A1 is charged with a violation for leaving the court for an unauthorized reason. (9-7)

9.3.2 Situation B: A1 and A2 set a double screen near the end line. A3 intentionally goes out of bounds outside the end line to have his/her defender detained by the double screen. Ruling: The official shall call a violation on A3 as soon as he/she steps out of bounds. The ball is awarded to Team B at a designated spot nearest to where the violation occurred.

9.3.2 Situation C: A1 and A2 set a double screen near the end line. B3 intentionally goes out of bounds outside the end line to avoid being detained by A1 and A2. Just as B3 goes out of bounds, A3's try is in flight. Ruling: B3 is called for a leaving-the-floor violation. Team A will receive the ball out of bounds at a spot nearest to where the violation occurred. Since the violation is on the defense, the ball does not become dead until the try has ended. If the try is successful, it will count. (6-7-9 Exception d)

9.3.2 Situation D: The score is tied 60-60 with four seconds remaining in the game. A1 has a fast break and is near the free-throw line on his/her way to an uncontested lay-up. B5 running down the court near the sideline, intentionally runs out of bounds in the hopes of getting a leaving-the-floor violation called. Ruling: B5's intentional violation should be ignored and A1's activity should continue without interruption. Comment: Non-contact, away from the ball, illegal defensive violations (i.e. excessively swinging the elbows, leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason) specifically designed to stop the clock near the end of a period or take away a clear advantageous position by the offense should be temporarily ignored. The defensive team should not benefit from the tactic. If time is not a factor, the defense should be penalized with the violation or a technical foul for unsporting behavior. (10-1-8)

[doubleringer]

Were you at a camp in Iowa? Which one? I was in Pella Friday night to help out with the camp.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by doubleringer

Were you at a camp in Iowa? Which one? I was in Pella Friday night to help out with the camp.

Are you asking me or Johnny?

[doubleringer]

Sorry, I was asking Josh from the OP. He has Iowa listed as his location.

[M&M Guy]

No problem - I try to stay out of Iowa as much as possible.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

No problem - I try to stay out of Iowa as much as possible.

That's just the kind of mean-spirited banter that chases such esteemed members as Dan away from here.

[truerookie]

B2 obtains lega guarding position on A1, who is dribbling near the sideline. B2 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline or (b) one foot in the air over the OOB area when A1 contacts B2 in the torso.

Ruling: In (a), B2 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position. In (b), A1 is called for a player -control foul because B2 had obtained and maintained legal guarding position (4-23-3a)

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by truerookie

B2 obtains lega guarding position on A1, who is dribbling near the sideline. B2 stays in the path of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline or (b) one foot in the air over the OOB area when A1 contacts B2 in the torso.

Ruling: In (a), B2 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position. In (b), A1 is called for a player -control foul because B2 had obtained and maintained legal guarding position (4-23-3a)

That's the one.

B2 is called for a foul, not a violation for being OOB.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by truerookie

B2 obtains lega guarding position on A1, who is dribbling near the sideline. B2 stays in the path (implies movement) of A1 but in doing so has (a) one foot touching the sideline or (b) one foot in the air over the OOB area when A1 contacts B2 in the torso.

Ruling: In (a), B2 is called for a blocking foul because a player may not be out of bounds and obtain or maintain legal guarding position. In (b), A1 is called for a player -control foul because B2 had obtained and maintained legal guarding position (4-23-3a)

Here is the KEY point that some just don't understand. It's all about LGP...you can't have it OOB. If the play doesn't require LGP, this case/rule is irrelevant and a player's location is not relevant regarding a foul.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Um, yup, I sureasheck am saying that. That's case book play 9.3.3SitB. It doesn't differentiate between it happening during a throw-in or the ball already being in play. Both situations can happen during a live ball and in both cases a player is gaining an illegal advantage during the live ball.

But that's the exact opposite of what you said in the thread that I quoted above. In that thread, some people were arguing that it was a violation for a teammate of the thrower-in to go out of bounds on the endline to go around a screen. You argued that it was NOT a violation because the teammate is authorized to be out of bounds during a non-designated spot throw-in. You said "Going OOB on the same line during a teammate's non designated spot throw-in is always authorized." Now in this thread, you're saying going out of bounds to go around a screen would be a violation.

I know it's the presidential election season, but that's a pretty big flip-flop, Jurassic.