Late Game Boundary Violation

[Spence]

We are to issue a warning if a defender crosses the plane during a throw-in assuming no warning has already been issued.

Team A scores and is now down 1 with 4 seconds left. B is out of timeouts and immediately steps across the boundary without touching the ball or the thrower. I assume by rule we blow the whistle, stop the clock, and issue a warning. If so the defense has gained an advantage by having the clock stopped.

Am I right on my understanding?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Spence

We are to issue a warning if a defender crosses the plane during a throw-in assuming no warning has already been issued.

Team A scores and is now down 1 with 4 seconds left. B is out of timeouts and immediately steps across the boundary without touching the ball or the thrower. I assume by rule we blow the whistle, stop the clock, and issue a warning. If so the defense has gained an advantage by having the clock stopped.

Am I right on my understanding?

No. Let the clock run.

[Spence]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

No. Let the clock run.

As in "act like I don't see it?"

Originally Posted by Spence

As in "act like I don't see it?"

Not that we "act as if we don't see it" we just ignore it. The comment under 9.2.10 should explain it for you.

[Spence]

Thanks for the clarification and the case play.

I'm a smarter official.

[Back In The Saddle]

Here's the case play and note, in case you don't have your case book handy:

9.2.10 SITUATION: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hands. Team B has not been warned previously for a throw-in plane infraction. RULING: B1 is charged with a technical foul and it also results in the official having a team warning recorded and reported to the head coach. COMMENT: In situations with the clock running and five or less seconds left in the game, a throw-in plane violation or interfering with the ball following a goal should be ignored if its only purpose is to stop the clock. However, if the tactic in any way interferes with the thrower’s efforts to make a throw-in, a technical foul for delay shall be called even though no previous warning had been issued. In this situation, if the official stopped the clock and issued a team warning, it would allow the team to benefit from the tactic. (4-
47-1; 10-1-5c)

[rlarry]

I believe late in the game, if it doesn't affect the thrower in, you ignore, If there is contact, or in your judgment, (this is why we get big $) the act affected the throw in it is a T plus a warning.

[jdw3018]

See Case 9.2.10 COMMENT. It addresses the exact play you've outlined. An official is to ignore the throw-in plane violation if its only purpose is to stop the clock, unless the tactic interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throw-in, and then a technical foul shall be called even though no previous warning has been issued.