The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Muff during Spot Throw In? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/47796-muff-during-spot-throw.html)

Freddy Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:12am
Muff during Spot Throw In?
 
Gals and Gents,

Sitch:
"The thrower on a spot throw-in with the ball put at his disposal, after muffing the ball which rolls away from his spot out-of-bounds, may go retrieve the ball, return to his designated spot, and throw the ball in without a violation."

This was expressed to me by a credible source. As with anything I hear, I want to run it by the rules, and I can't find anywhere that this is allowable. Only that, "The thrower must keep one foot on or over the spot until the ball is released." (4-42-6 NOTE).

Has anybody ever heard of such a thing not being a violation?

MidMadness Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:28am
My take...
 
Toot the whistle, get the ball back, readminister, play on...??

Ch1town Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:29am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy
Gals and Gents,

Sitch:
"The thrower on a spot throw-in with the ball put at his disposal, after muffing the ball which rolls away from his spot out-of-bounds, may go retrieve the ball, return to his designated spot, give to official to re-administer and throw the ball in without a violation."

This was expressed to me by a credible source. As with anything I hear, I want to run it by the rules, and I can't find anywhere that this is allowable. Only that, "The thrower must keep one foot on or over the spot until the ball is released." (4-42-6 NOTE).

Has anybody ever heard of such a thing not being a violation?
Yes, the player muffed the ball. Let's fix it & resume play.

just another ref Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:44am
A muff indicates a pass that was not handled cleanly, does it not? If the official passed the ball to the thrower and it is not handled, redo it. If the thrower fumbles the ball away, I don't see how you can help him.

mick Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:50am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ch1town
Yes, the player muffed the ball. Let's fix it & resume play.
[Dependent of level of play]
Once I give him the ball, he's in charge.
When he muffs the ball due to a fake pass, or due to too many thumbs, if he leaves the designated spot he causes a violation of 7-6-3 leaving the spot before releasing a throw-in pass.

Lower levels could easily be do-overs.

Adam Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:56am
I believe the case play for this is under free throw administration.

Ch1town Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:57am
Mick - I agree, but didn't know we were speaking of faked passes... that would definitely be the players fault.

Adam Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:01am
"Muff" to me means the player never cleanly received the "pass" from the official. If he has the ball, fakes a pass, and loses control, all bets are off.

mick Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
I believe the case play for this is under free throw administration.
I don't think so. If the muff, during a throw-in, was meant to be a consideration, then it would have it's own case.

bob jenkins Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:13am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells
"Muff" to me means the player never cleanly received the "pass" from the official. If he has the ball, fakes a pass, and loses control, all bets are off.
I agree.

But, there is (or was) an NCAA case play to the effect mentioned in the OP (after "controlling" (and I don't mean to imply Player Control) the ball, and then losing it, the player may retrieve it, return to the original spot and complete the throw-in)

JugglingReferee Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:12am
US football codes nicely defines muff as trying to obtain possession. A fumble is losing control of the ball when a player had possession.

Extending these terms along with JAR's comment is spot on. If we do re-admin the TI, start the 5-second count over, too.

jdmara Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by JugglingReferee
If we do re-admin the TI, start the 5-second count over, too.
Good point! lol It seems obvious to most but we know where assuming will get you.

-Josh

Nevadaref Wed Aug 27, 2008 02:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob jenkins
I agree.

But, there is (or was) an NCAA case play to the effect mentioned in the OP (after "controlling" (and I don't mean to imply Player Control) the ball, and then losing it, the player may retrieve it, return to the original spot and complete the throw-in)
That's correct. Here is the ruling from the NCAA's 2008 Case Book.

Throw-in
A.R. 157.
A1, on a throw-in from a designated spot, fumbles. A1 leaves the
designated spot to retrieve the fumble. Is this a violation?
RULING: No. Since there was a fumble, the official shall blow his/her
whistle, which causes the ball to become dead, and then shall re-administer
the throw-in.
(Rule 7-6.5)

The NFHS has such a ruling for a FT shooter, but not for an inbounder.
FREE-THROWER LOSES BALL
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free throw line to attempt a free throw (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) accidentally drops the ball before the throwing motion is started. RULING: In (a) and (b) the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again.

mick Wed Aug 27, 2008 04:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
That's correct. Here is the ruling from the NCAA's 2008 Case Book.

Throw-in

A.R. 157.
A1, on a throw-in from a designated spot, fumbles. A1 leaves the

designated spot to retrieve the fumble. Is this a violation?

RULING: No. Since there was a fumble, the official shall blow his/her

whistle, which causes the ball to become dead, and then shall re-administer
the throw-in.
(Rule 7-6.5)
Good rule.

M&M Guy Wed Aug 27, 2008 05:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Throw-in
A.R. 157.
A1, on a throw-in from a designated spot, fumbles. A1 leaves the
designated spot to retrieve the fumble. Is this a violation?
RULING: No. Since there was a fumble, the official shall blow his/her
whistle, which causes the ball to become dead, and then shall re-administer
the throw-in.
(Rule 7-6.5)

The NFHS has such a ruling for a FT shooter, but not for an inbounder.
FREE-THROWER LOSES BALL
9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free throw line to attempt a free throw (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) accidentally drops the ball before the throwing motion is started. RULING: In (a) and (b) the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again.
It's interesting the NCAA does use the word "fumble", while the NFHS uses both "muffs" and "accidentally drops". It seems as though there may not be a difference in control, like the football reference between the words "fumble" and "muff".

While I don't disagree with the philosophy that a player that loses control while trying to fake a pass is different than a player that doesn't catch the pass cleanly from the official, there doesn't seem to be that distinction in the rules.

BillyMac Wed Aug 27, 2008 05:54pm
Good Citations ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Here is the ruling from the NCAA's 2008 Case Book. Throw-in A.R. 157. A1, on a throw-in from a designated spot, fumbles. A1 leaves thedesignated spot to retrieve the fumble. Is this a violation? RULING: No. Since there was a fumble, the official shall blow his/herwhistle, which causes the ball to become dead, and then shall re-administer the throw-in (Rule 7-6.5

The NFHS has such a ruling for a FT shooter, but not for an inbounder.
FREE-THROWER LOSES BALL 9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free throw line to attempt a free throw (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) accidentally drops the ball before the throwing motion is started. RULING: In (a) and (b) the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again.
Nevaderef: Thanks for the citations. I wish the NFHS would have a casebook play, as the NCAA does, covering a fumbled throwin. Unless the player throwing in the ball is faking a pass, or doing something else with the ball to distract the defenders, if he, or she, simply drops the ball (fumbles, muff, etc.), I'm probably going to treat it as the NCAA citation, even if it's a NFHS game.

Nevadaref Wed Aug 27, 2008 06:50pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
Nevaderef: Thanks for the citations. I wish the NFHS would have a casebook play, as the NCAA does, covering a fumbled throwin. Unless the player throwing in the ball is faking a pass, or doing something else with the ball to distract the defenders, if he, or she, simply drops the ball (fumbles, muff, etc.), I'm probably going to treat it as the NCAA citation, even if it's a NFHS game.
:(

I'll readminister on a muff, but not on a fumble. Why does the player deserve another chance?

If A1 is holding the ball at the top of the key and drops it so that it rolls away, would you blow the whistle and give the ball back to the player? That would be silly.

BillyMac Wed Aug 27, 2008 07:30pm
I See Your Point, But ...
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
I'll readminister on a muff, but not on a fumble. Why does the player deserve another chance? If A1 is holding the ball at the top of the key and drops it so that it rolls away, would you blow the whistle and give the ball back to the player?
I would if the player was a free throw shooter, and holding a live ball, as in Casebook Play 9.1.1, so why would I not do the same thing with a throwin that was accidently dropped before the "passing" motion is started. To credit your side of this situation, in the case of the free throw, there is team control involved, whereas, in the case of the throwin, there is no team contol involved. Maybe that's why the NCAA can have such an interpretation. I don't do NCAA games, but, isn't there team control on an NCAA throwin, whereas, there is no team contol on an NFHS throwin?

M&M Guy Wed Aug 27, 2008 08:14pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
I'll readminister on a muff, but not on a fumble. Why does the player deserve another chance?
So, tell me, what's the difference between a "fumble" (your word), and "accidental drop" (the wording in the NFHS case play)?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
If A1 is holding the ball at the top of the key and drops it so that it rolls away, would you blow the whistle and give the ball back to the player? That would be silly.
Of course it would be silly - there's no rule or case play that would allow it.

But there is a case play that allows an official to stop play when a player accidentally drops a live ball while the clock is stopped (i.e.: a free throw). The NCAA A.R takes it the step further by allowing the same stoppage on the throw-in. While I understand your position, and for the most part agree with it, I'm just trying to figure where we get to include "intent" in our decision?

Nevadaref Wed Aug 27, 2008 09:01pm
We have to follow what the rules are for the level at which we are officiating, but I still get to have my opinion about those rulings.

I agree with readministering a FT or a throw-in if the player never gained control of the ball (muffed it/never caught it), but I disagree with doing so if the player clearly had it and then lost it (fumble or drop). I don't see why he deserves a second chance after screwing up. JMO.

Fan10 Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:23pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by M&M Guy
So, tell me, what's the difference between a "fumble" (your word), and "accidental drop" (the wording in the NFHS case play)?


Of course it would be silly - there's no rule or case play that would allow it.

But there is a case play that allows an official to stop play when a player accidentally drops a live ball while the clock is stopped (i.e.: a free throw). The NCAA A.R takes it the step further by allowing the same stoppage on the throw-in. While I understand your position, and for the most part agree with it, I'm just trying to figure where we get to include "intent" in our decision?
I'm not arguing with you because I see exactly where you are coming from. But, let me ask this question: Say that the inbounder is having trouble getting the ball inbounds. The ref has reached a 4 count. Instead of calling timeout, the inbounder simply drops the ball. According to the case book quote above, he's going to get a fresh 5.

LDUB Thu Aug 28, 2008 12:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fan10
I'm not arguing with you because I see exactly where you are coming from. But, let me ask this question: Say that the inbounder is having trouble getting the ball inbounds. The ref has reached a 4 count. Instead of calling timeout, the inbounder simply drops the ball. According to the case book quote above, he's going to get a fresh 5.
That isn't what the case play says. The throw in is re-administered only if there is a fumble.

Camron Rust Thu Aug 28, 2008 01:34am
Quote:
Originally Posted by LDUB
That isn't what the case play says. The throw in is re-administered only if there is a fumble.
And do you think a smart player will not be able to fake a fumble?

I don't like the rule. To easy to abuse. The player, once he has control, should hang onto the ball. If it slips away from them, they shoudn't get a 2nd chance.

Nevadaref Thu Aug 28, 2008 02:39am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Padgett
If he dives towards the ball after muffing it does that make him a, er, never mind. :rolleyes:
Whoa, you might offend someone such as rainmaker! Oh wait, she's not around anymore. Carry on then.

JugglingReferee Thu Aug 28, 2008 07:22am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevadaref
Whoa, you might offend someone such as rainmaker! Oh wait, she's not around anymore. Carry on then.
She popped her head up a couple weeks ago - I bet she is reading some, still. Or maybe not. I dunno.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:08pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1