Stumped
 

Coach asked a pretty good question which my partner and I were unable to answer with any conviction. before our game he said he had an inbounds where his girl A2 is standing three feet to the right of A1 who is inbounding, after A1 inbounds to A3, she takes a one or two steps to her right as she enters the court to use A2 as a screen. I looked over rule 9 on violations and found nothing.

My gut feeling is it's a violation as the intent is to deceive the defender before she is legally on the court, it's comparable to running out of bounds to go around a screen, or sneeking down the sideline out of bounds to avoid the opposition. Of course you could say when inbounding, using a ball fake on defender is used for deception also.

I'm thinking there is language somewhere to immmediately returning to the court, yet in the most circuitous manner is not mentioned.

Technical foul.

I wish they'd make this a violation, but Bob's right.

The horse is out of the barn.........I did mean to say tech.

Is there a casebook on this or rule citing?

If it is not a spot throw in, isn't team A allowed to have more than one person OOB?

Say then that A1 and A2 enter at the same time.... What would be wrong with this?

C'mon guys, 1 or 2 steps.

I've got nothing.

Fair enough. You can't call a violation, because A1 was OOB for an authorized reason. The only rule you could invoke here would be the T. But I'd consider 1 or 2 steps to be close enough to directly onto the court.

Stick to the thread..........

Once the ball is released for the throwin pass, all players who are legally OOB must return immediately to the playing court.

I'm with you on this, BBR, failed in description to say almost within three feet boundary allowance given to inbounder. A definite 'had to be there situation.'

Any blatant deception entering would certainly warrant a T.

How am I off topic? If A2 is three feet to the right of A1 who is inbounding and therefore OOB, isn't A2 also OOB?

If A2 is on the court, then I misread the question. I was picturing this as 2 players OOB coming onto the court at the same time, and one using the other as a pick as they return together. (obviously this would not apply if it were a spot throw-in, but that was not made clear)

A2 is on the court in the OP; how does A2 set a legal screen for A1 otherwise?

I suppose then it would fall on us to determine whether the entry was immediate. The 'letter of the law' might be the shortest route. That said, someone's two steps might be more 'immediate' than someone's one step.

What if player was backed up 8-10 feet within 3 foot boundary and after in bounding, ball was tipped going at a 90% degree angle to inbounder and he makes a diagonal cut to go where the ball is headed. The shortest route for reentry would be straight ahead.

If they enter the court at the same time, then A1 takes their 1 or 2 steps to go around A2 who just came onto the court also.

Yes, A2 is on the court.

Reread OP!

Then most likely I would have nothing here. I agree that it is one of those had to be there situations. If you were to call anything though it would be a technical

This initially made it sound to me like both players were OOB. I know now that they were not.

Sorry, I didn't make it clear enough, edited OP.

Price does not include taxes.
 

10-3-2: A player shall not: Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.

10.3.2 SITUATION A: A1 has the ball out of bounds for a throw-in. A1 completes the throw-in to A2 and then purposefully delays his/her return by taking four or five steps along the end line prior to coming inbounds behind a screen set by A3 and A4. A1 gets a return pass from A2 and takes an unchallenged try for goal. RULING: A1 is charged with a technical foul for purposefully delaying his/her return to the court following the throw-in. A1’s movement out of bounds along the end line was to take advantage of the screen and return to the court in a more advantageous position.

Original post states, "one or two steps", while the casebook play states, "four or five steps". Is this a significant difference?

Here is the rule reference for you also..... 10-3-2 A player shall not: Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.

The case book also says "purposefully delays." There's no delay here.

I could allow one step by A1, because A1 could still be considered to be inside the three foot wide space, two steps would be questionable, in my mind, but three, or more steps, like the four, or five steps, mentioned in the casebook play, would be gaining an advantage, and would thus be illegal, in my opinion. It's that second step that would have me thinking, "Hmm?".

The rule doesn't say a player has to step directly inbounds. It says the thrower can't "purposely and/or deceitfully delay." Where is the purpose, the deceit or the delay in what you describe?

Don't be a plumber.

No user-serviceable parts inside.
 

By the rulebook, you may be correct, but the casebook is considered to be a supplement to the rule book to help us interpret the rules, and should not be ignored. Four, or five steps are illegal, according to the casebook. I would have no problem with a single step being legal. It's the second step, or third step, that would have me scratching my head, and thinking, "Hmm". I'm not sure how I would call it, maybe I had to have been there.

Side note. I do agree with Snaqwells, this should be a violation, like the player that purposely leaves the court to go around a screen. Seems like similar situations, players being in places they're not supposed to be to get an advantage involving a screen. Penalty should be the same in both cases.