delay of game/throw-in

[Jburt]

I have searched through some past threads but haven't had any luck finding an answer. I also do not have my books with me at work...

60seconds on officiating got me thinking about this situation:
A1 is inbounding. B1 reaches across the boundary line and contacts A1

I know that is an intentional foul my question is: is a delay of game warning also issued for breaking the plane?

[zm1283]

Yes.

[IREFU2]

Beat me too it, its and intentional foul as well a delay warning.....so they get two for the price of one (NFHS)!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jburt

60seconds on officiating got me thinking about this situation:
A1 is inbounding. B1 reaches across the boundary line and contacts A1

Book's in the car, but is contact an automatic foul here?

[cdoug]

Yes, automatic.

9-2-10 Penalty 4: "If an opponent(s) of the thrower reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and fouls the thrower, an intentional personal foul shall be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Book's in the car, but is contact an automatic foul here?

Originally Posted by cdoug

Yes, automatic.

9-2-10 Penalty 4: "If an opponent(s) of the thrower reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and fouls the thrower, an intentional personal foul shall be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required."

I know a foul here is automatically intentional, that wasn't my question.
My question is whether "contact" automatically equals a foul in this case. Your rule quote above seems to answer that in the negative. Contact does not necessarily mean a foul must be called.

[IREFU2]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I know a foul here is automatically intentional, that wasn't my question.
My question is whether "contact" automatically equals a foul in this case. Your rule quote above seems to answer that in the negative. Contact does not necessarily mean a foul must be called.

What other reason would the defender have to make contact with a player out of bounds on a throw in? If they reach across and contact the thrower in, its an intentional foul. Now, I normally tell players in this situation not to break the plain on a throw in......just my 2 cents.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by IREFU2

What other reason would the defender have to make contact with a player out of bounds on a throw in? If they reach across and contact the thrower in, its an intentional foul. Now, I normally tell players in this situation not to break the plain on a throw in......just my 2 cents.

I don't care about the reason. It's irrelevant.

If the contact doesn't affect the play, it's not a foul (by rule.) Just call the delay of game at this poing.

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I know a foul here is automatically intentional, that wasn't my question.
My question is whether "contact" automatically equals a foul in this case. Your rule quote above seems to answer that in the negative. Contact does not necessarily mean a foul must be called.

NO warning for delay required here reflects that you do not have to issue the warning prior to making the call.

however I would assume that the warning comes with the call as is the action of reaching through the plane is violation, the NCAA specificall covers this in several sections to say the warning comes with the foul call.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

NO warning for delay required here reflects that you do not have to issue the warning prior to making the call.

however I would assume that the warning comes with the call as is the action of reaching through the plane is violation, the NCAA specificall covers this in several sections to say the warning comes with the foul call.

Agreed, but I've never contradicted this. NFHS also specifically states that if you call an intentional or technical for this, the warning is issued at the same time.

[Illini_Ref]

I have this understanding of this rule.

A opponent can never reach across and touch the ball BEFORE it is released. If it has been released it can be touched by reaching through the plane UNLESS it is NOT a spot throw-in.

Examples: A1 has a designated spot throw-in. A1 releases the ball on a throw-in. B1 reaches through the plane and contacts the ball while it is out of A1's hands. I have nothing here.

Now let's say the throw-in by A1 is after a made basket by B. Same thing occurs, I have a warning for breaking the plane.

This is the way this rule has been interpreted for me. Is this correct? I don't have access to a book right now, but I know that there is language in there about reaching through BEFORE the ball is released on a throw-in during a spot throw-in.

[Adam]

Close. If the ball has been released for the throwin pass, B1 is free to reach across. It gets tricky on an endline throwin (or it could, anyway) because A1 might be throwing to a teammate standing OOB. If this happens and B1 reaches across, it's a violation. If A1 throws to a teammate inbounds, B1 may reach across.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

It gets tricky on an endline throwin (or it could, anyway) because A1 might be throwing to a teammate standing OOB. If this happens and B1 reaches across, it's a violation.

Actually, it's a technical.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by just another ref

Actually, it's a technical.

Only if a) they've already been warned, or b) they hit the ball.

Either way, it's still under rule 9, violations.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Only if a) they've already been warned, or b) they hit the ball.

Either way, it's still under rule 9, violations.

The post prior to your involved contact with the ball, so I assumed that's what we were still talking about.