You put it down, wrong team picks it up

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by rlarry

Under Fed rules you can blow your whistle and make it right as long as the throw in has not legally ended.

rlarry:

Play #1: Team A has been awarded a throw-in after a timeout. The administering official has placed the ball at A1's disposable by bouncing the ball to A1 and A1 catches the ball. B1, who is guarding A1, steps out-of-bounds and grabs the ball out of A1's hands.

Play #2: Team A has been awarded a throw-in after a timeout. Team A does not leave its huddle after the timeout ends and the administering official has placed the ball at A1's disposable by placing the ball on the floor. B1 steps out-of-bounds and grabs the ball.

What is the difference between Play #1 and Play #2.

MTD, Sr.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

The administering official has placed the ball at A1's disposable by placing the ball on the floor. B1 steps out-of-bounds and grabs the ball out of A1's hands.

How did the ball get from the floor into A1's hands?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

How did the ball get from the floor into A1's hands?

I did not edit my cutting and pasting. I will edit my OP immediately.

MTD, Sr.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BayStateRef

Kids travel playoffs (7th grade).

Following a time-out, the offensive team is slow to break the huddle, while the defensive team is on the court. The official puts the ball on the floor and starts the 5-second count. One of the defensive players, who clearly is not sure what is gong on, goes out-of-bounds and picks up the ball. Now what?

2008-09 NFHS Basketball Case Book
*7.5.1 SITUATION B: Team A does not break the huddle after the second horn
for a 60-second time-out. The official puts the ball down at the designated spot
and begins the five-second count. The administering official is between four and
five on the count when Team B reaches over the boundary and grabs the ball.
RULING: Delay-of-game warning on Team B for reaching across the plane. No
Team A member ever possessed the ball for the throw-in; therefore, a technical
foul would not be assessed. (9-2 Penalty 3)

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

rlarry:

Play #1: Team A has been awarded a throw-in after a timeout. The administering official has placed the ball at A1's disposable by bouncing the ball to A1 and A1 catches the ball. B1, who is guarding A1, steps out-of-bounds and grabs the ball out of A1's hands.

Pla #2: Team A has been awarded a throw-in after a timeout. Team A does not leave its huddle after the timeout ends and the administering official has placed the ball at A1's disposable by placing the ball on the floor. B1 steps out-of-bounds and grabs the ball out of A1's hands.

What is the difference between Play #1 and Play #2.

MTD, Sr.

"No Team A member ever possessed the ball for the throw-in" as stated in the above case play.
It is a new ruling for this year, so perhaps you just learned something new!

[BayStateRef]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

It is a new ruling for this year, so perhaps you just learned something new!

Thanks. My 08-09 book is in my bag...not by the computer.

My partner was the administering official. As soon as the wrong player picked up the ball, he blew the whistle and took the ball back. But he did not issue the warning.

Reading the OP and the case play, I don't think we really have a definitive answer. This is a case of where the B player went OOB and picked up the ball. The case play only says what to do when they reach through the boundary and pick it up. What about if she comes OOB without reaching through the boundary, and picks up the ball? You can't issue a warning there because she's not reaching through the boundary per se. I'll just sit back with my popcorn and listen to the comments fly.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

Reading the OP and the case play, I don't think we really have a definitive answer. This is a case of where the B player went OOB and picked up the ball. The case play only says what to do when they reach through the boundary and pick it up. What about if she comes OOB without reaching through the boundary, and picks up the ball? You can't issue a warning there because she's not reaching through the boundary per se. I'll just sit back with my popcorn and listen to the comments fly.

So you think there's a difference between "reaching through" the boundary and "crossing" the boundary?

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

So you think there's a difference between "reaching through" the boundary and "crossing" the boundary?

Reading the OP, I see a distinct difference in the action. That's why I'm throwing the idea between the two out there and see what everyone has to say. There is no case play for what happened in the OP, and the case play that has been presented doesn't seem to fit the OP. I know Mark makes a good case for the warning because of the prevention of A's ability to make the throw-in, and I would almost go along with that thought process. The OP and the lack of case play basically brings into play some thought process on our part.

[Texas Aggie]

Physical possession of the ball has nothing to do with the play.

You might want to clarify this statement since the rule in question says, "touches...the ball while in possession of the thrower or being passed to a teammate..."

You might have a T on this play if its the second warning. I had this happen once years ago. You HAVE to prevent the defensive player from coming to get the ball. I always say, "this is NOT your ball; don't touch it."

[LDUB]

Originally Posted by Ref Ump Welsch

Reading the OP, I see a distinct difference in the action. That's why I'm throwing the idea between the two out there and see what everyone has to say. There is no case play for what happened in the OP, and the case play that has been presented doesn't seem to fit the OP. I know Mark makes a good case for the warning because of the prevention of A's ability to make the throw-in, and I would almost go along with that thought process. The OP and the lack of case play basically brings into play some thought process on our part.

The violation is for B having any part of their body through the plane; it has nothing to do with reaching through. Therefore the violation occurs when B walks out of bounds to pick up the ball.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

2008-09 NFHS Basketball Case Book
*7.5.1 SITUATION B: Team A does not break the huddle after the second horn
for a 60-second time-out. The official puts the ball down at the designated spot
and begins the five-second count. The administering official is between four and
five on the count when Team B reaches over the boundary and grabs the ball.
RULING: Delay-of-game warning on Team B for reaching across the plane. No
Team A member ever possessed the ball for the throw-in; therefore, a technical
foul would not be assessed. (9-2 Penalty 3)


"No Team A member ever possessed the ball for the throw-in" as stated in the above case play.
It is a new ruling for this year, so perhaps you just learned something new!

Nevada:

First, I went back to my OP and edited it so it made sense. Second, I am getting old and senile. I really do not like the ruling in NFHS Casebook Play 7.5.1 SITUATION B. Physical possession of the ball has nothing to do with the play. I have had this situation occur in the past (it has been a few years since the last time it happened; I even had in occur in a girls' varsity game) and each time I issued a team warning for delay of game if one had not been given and charged the player with a TF for delay of game. Whether B1 grabs the ball out of A1's hands or picks the ball up off of the floor B1's action is a delay of game that prevents Team A from completing or attempting to make a throw-in. This is just another case of an interpretation made by people who do not know the rules.

MTD, Sr.

[Old_School]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Nevada:

This is just another case of an interpretation made by people who do not know the rules.

No, it was another case of you not knowing the rule until Nevada clued you in. And now that you (hopefully) do know it, (hopefully) you will now follow it if the situation ever does come up- whether you happen to like or agree with the interpretation.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Old_School

No, it was another case of you not knowing the rule until Nevada clued you in. And now that you (hopefully) do know it, (hopefully) you will now follow it if the situation ever does come up- whether you happen to like or agree with the interpretation.

Wow. Are you serious? "Another case" of MTD not knowing the rule? You got another one, highhorse?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Old_School

No, it was another case of you not knowing the rule until Nevada clued you in. And now that you (hopefully) do know it, (hopefully) you will now follow it if the situation ever does come up- whether you happen to like or agree with the interpretation.

OS:

Noooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It has been a long year (believe me it has and it is still not over yet, come to think of it the basketball season never ends), and it is a new interpretation that was added to the NFHS Casebook this school year that I forgot. Plus, as I stated in my post that I have not had this situation happen in a game in a number of years. And that based upon the rules, I handled it correctly (in my humble opinion). And based upon my number of years as a student of the rules of the game, the interpretation can not be supported by rule.

NFHS R9-S2, Penalty 3 specifically specifies a ball that is possession of the thrower, and yes the ball is not in possession of the thrower in the play being discussed, BUT none of the penalties in NFHS R9-S2 cover the play being discussed and it is my humble opinion that hanging one's hat on the "while in the possession of the thrower" clause is a very flimsy position to take in this play.

And of course if you are a reincarnation of our group's favorite Old School, then you have never been one for backing up a ruling with rule support.

MTD, Sr.

[WreckRef]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

rlarry:

Play #1: Team A has been awarded a throw-in after a timeout. The administering official has placed the ball at A1's disposable by bouncing the ball to A1 and A1 catches the ball. B1, who is guarding A1, steps out-of-bounds and grabs the ball out of A1's hands.

Play #2: Team A has been awarded a throw-in after a timeout. Team A does not leave its huddle after the timeout ends and the administering official has placed the ball at A1's disposable by placing the ball on the floor. B1 steps out-of-bounds and grabs the ball.

What is the difference between Play #1 and Play #2.

MTD, Sr.

There is no difference. Isn't the ball at A's disposal once the RPP begins? So whether B1 reaches across the plane or steps OOB to get the ball, it's a warning if it's the 1st violation or TF if it's the 2nd.