Muff during Spot Throw In?

[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, 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]

Toot the whistle, get the ball back, readminister, play on...??

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]

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]

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]

I believe the case play for this is under free throw administration.

Mick - I agree, but didn't know we were speaking of faked passes... that would definitely be the players fault.

[Adam]

"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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.