Jump or OOB Vio?

[UNH IM Ref]

A UNH IM bball ref asked me the other day if player A1 has possession of the ball inbounds and player B1, with one foot out of bounds, attempts to take possession away from A1 and a held ball situation arises is there any difference to the call because of the out of bounds position the defensive player has... i.e. the defensive player doesn't have legal guarding position so he may not make contact with the ball or the player? What do you guys think, I've been racking my brains..

[Da Official]

Originally Posted by UNH IM Ref

A UNH IM bball ref asked me the other day if player A1 has possession of the ball inbounds and player B1, with one foot out of bounds, attempts to take possession away from A1 and a held ball situation arises is there any difference to the call because of the out of bounds position the defensive player has... i.e. the defensive player doesn't have legal guarding position so he may not make contact with the ball or the player? What do you guys think, I've been racking my brains..

Once any player who is OOB touches the ball the ball becomes dead. The opponent is then awarded a Throw-In.

[Amesman]

Originally Posted by Da Official

Once any player who is OOB touches the ball the ball becomes dead. The opponent is then awarded a Throw-In.

The exception being, of course, if it's an inbounder who's out of bounds (now there's a mind bender at first) at the time of a held ball.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Amesman

The exception being, of course, if it's an inbounder who's out of bounds (now there's a mind bender at first) at the time of a held ball.

Aren't all inbounders out-of-bounds? If not, they must then be inbounds (the opposite of out of bounds). When they become inbounds, they have violated, and therefore are no longer inbounders, since the ball is dead.

[shishstripes]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Aren't all inbounders out-of-bounds? If not, they must then be inbounds (the opposite of out of bounds). When they become inbounds, they have violated, and therefore are no longer inbounders, since the ball is dead.

I get what he saying, if the thrower reaches the ball through the plane and the defender grabs the ball causing a held ball call, you can have one person OOB in this case.

[UNH IM Ref]

Originally Posted by shishstripes

I get what he saying, if the thrower reaches the ball through the plane and the defender grabs the ball causing a held ball call, you can have one person OOB in this case.

Well in that case I have a T for not giving the inbounder enough space.

I know we're going off the OP a bit here but I wanted to make sure the inbounder is allowed to hand the ball off to a teammate, or would it be a same team heldball that would result in a travel or OOB vio. ?????

[Adam]

Originally Posted by UNH IM Ref

A UNH IM bball ref asked me the other day if player A1 has possession of the ball inbounds and player B1, with one foot out of bounds, attempts to take possession away from A1 and a held ball situation arises is there any difference to the call because of the out of bounds position the defensive player has... i.e. the defensive player doesn't have legal guarding position so he may not make contact with the ball or the player? What do you guys think, I've been racking my brains..

The part in red is incorrect. LGP is irrelevant here anyway.

Da Official has the correct ruling. I've had lots of would-be-held-balls that ended up being OOB violations instead.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Da Official

Once any player who is OOB touches the ball the ball becomes dead. The opponent is then awarded a Throw-In.

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

The part in red is incorrect. LGP is irrelevant here anyway.

Da Official has the correct ruling. I've had lots of would-be-held-balls that ended up being OOB violations instead.

Saying that the part in red is incorrect is misleading. The player with OOB status does NOT have LGP by definition. That player cannot contact the ball without causing an OOB violation. However, that player MAY contact another player, but may not do so in a way which constitutes a foul. That is the only part which I find to be slightly incorrect.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Saying that the part in red is incorrect is misleading. The player with OOB status does NOT have LGP by definition. That player cannot contact the ball without causing an OOB violation. However, that player MAY contact another player, but may not do so in a way which constitutes a foul. That is the only part which I find to be slightly incorrect.

Good point. I fixed it so the part in red is incorrect. My point was, LGP is not relevant to whether a player may touch the ball. I think LGP is getting over used in these plays, and this is a classic example.