Going out of bounds
 

BJV game Team A runs a play where A1 takes the ball down the sideline, drawing defenders and then as his momentum is carrying him over the end line, but before his feet touch out of bound, he flings the ball across the court to a teammate set up for potentially an open look. Similar to a skip pass over the defense, but this pass is quicker and doesn't take as long thus potentially allowing the shooter a better look. The problem is that after A1 releases the ball his momentum carries him out of bounds where he runs along the baseline behind lead and back onto the court.

Is this legal? I know the rule states that no player shall leave the floor for any unauthorized reason. Does this fall into that category?

Technically, since he ran behind the lead along the baseline, it's a T for failing to return to the court after leaving for an authorized reason.

In practice, a violation might be a good call here.

If he comes right back onto the court, however, it's perfectly legal.

As long as he tried to get on the court as quickly as possible, I got nothing.

He left the court for an AUTHORIZED reason -- his momentum carried him out of bounds -- which is completely legal. The player is then expected to return to the court without delay. The rule does not specify that the player must return at the same spot from which he left. Therefore, I am going to give the player leeway in these situations.

For example, if a player takes a full speed right hand lay-up and his momentum carries him off of the court, he very well may end up coming back on the other side of the backboard since his momentum was carrying him in that direction. If I happen to be the lead on the opposite side, the player may end up quickly coming back to the court ending up behind at some point.

I am not going to go looking for trouble, here. If the player attempts to quickly return to the court, I have nothing. You really cannot call a violation, in my opinion, in this case. If you feel as though you HAVE to have SOMETHING, I believe that your only choice is a technical foul for not returning to the court. But, I am far more apt to let this go -- unless we have a 40 foot run along the end line.

My suggestion for next year's rule changes; make this a violation.

It already is a violation, in NFHS. They changed this a couple of years ago. Rule 9.3.3 :)

i'm not talking about leaving for an unauthorized reason.

I'm talking about 10.3.3; delaying returning to the court after being OOB for an authorized reason. That should be a violation, IMO.

Excellent answer. :)

FWIW, I read the OP to say the player went from one side of the backboard to the other. For some reason, I didn't imagine the lead was standing right there for A1 to go around.

The only time you would give a technical for leaving the floor for an unauthorized reason would be during a throw in against the player who threw the ball in per 10.3.2a case book.

Otherwise, you would have a violation if you felt the player left the playing floor for an unauthorized reason per 9.3.3.

This is how our rules interpreter wants this called.

In your case, you do not have a technical foul for leaving the court for an unauthorized reason -- as the inbounder, the player must, by definition, be leaving the court for an AUTHORIZED reason. You have a technical foul on the player for not returning directly to the floor.

Yup, the difference between 9-3-3 and 10-3-3.

Shaq,
If you think about it, the A1 drives hard to the basket from the right wing, and shoots a right hand lay-up. A1's momentum carries him 7 or 8 feet beyond the end line. B2 comes from the left side and quickly grabs the ball after the made lay-up and continues to his left (the side of A1's drive on the lay-up) to make the throw-in in that direction. Lead-becoming-trail moves from just outside lane line on A1's left side in the direction of the throw-in to get a better angle thus moving inside the lane line extended. A1 returns to the floor up his left lane line behind the official in the OP.

Yeah, i get it know. I just initially read it as A1 not returning directly.

Dashes for rules (e.g., 9-3-3).

Dots for cases (e.g., 9.3.3A)

I can't come up with a reason A1 is leaving the court except by his own choice. The ball isn't taking him there, he is taking it there. A1 is not trying to prevent an oob violation or gain possession of the ball as he already has the ball. No layup is involved. His momentum is not taking him oob, he is popelling himself there. How is this legal?

Thanks! :)

I don't think stopping this play is the intent of the rule. No way I'm calling it until I'm told very specifically to call it.

SamIAm,
The original post did indeed state that his momentum carried him out of bounds.

As Shaqs indicates, the rule is not there to prevent this action from happening. The rule is intended to target an offensive player trying to go around a defender who is hedging a screen along the end line (usually or sideline) or a defender trying to get around a screen with no room in bounds due to the positioning of the screener and the teammate using the screen along the end line (usually or the sideline).

I've never called it either.

But, while watching a HS game earlier this season (can't remember if it was F or JV) I saw one official call it three times on one team in the forth quarter!! :eek: <-- That's what the coach looked like!

There's a specific interp or case play that it is legal.

Even better.

Was this game played @ Riverton HS last Friday night?