Putting the ball in play...

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by wanja

Violation in A and B.

9-2-2 The ball shall be passed by the thrower directly into the court...

9-2-4 Once the throw-in starts, the ball shall be released on a pass directly into the court...

I suppose that the case could be made in A that the the ball did go directly from the thrower into the court if he/she bounced it only off their own body and it went directly into the court.

[grunewar]

Could, should, shall, will, may, might, must, sometimes, always, never......ah, it must be exam time........

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

I suppose that the case could be made in A that the the ball did go directly from the thrower into the court if he/she bounced it only off their own body and it went directly into the court.

You could make that case, but 9-2-2 and 9-2-4 require that the release constitute a pass: can you pass with your foot, or any other body part than your hand?

Hint: 4-39 says that "A pass is movement of the ball caused by a player who throws, bats or rolls the ball to another player." The case could be made that only hands can throw, bat, or roll.

[Nevadaref]

There is an NCAA case ruling which says to stop play and readminister the throw-in. The NFHS doesn't have such a ruling, but does have a very similar one for a FT.

I'm of the opinion that if the player screws up and loses the ball after having clear control, then that is his fault and he doesn't deserve another chance.

I would allow play to continue in case (a), but call a throw-in violation in case (b).

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

The NFHS doesn't have such a ruling, but does have a very similar one for a FT.

NFHS 9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)

[And-1]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

NFHS 9.1.1 SITUATION: A1, at the free-throw line to attempt a free throw: (a) muffs the pass from the official and it rolls forward; or (b) while performing his/her habitual dribbles prior to the release, accidentally allows the ball to deflect off his/her foot into the lane. RULING: In (a), the official should sound the whistle to prevent any violations and then start the free throw procedure again. No freethrow violation should be called in this situation. In (b), a free-throw violation shall be called on A1. (9-1-3a, e)

Is it still a violation if the free thrower ball deflect off his/her foot and a team member gets the ball and toss it back to his/her teamate to finish the free throw?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by And-1

Is it still a violation if the free thrower ball deflect off his/her foot and a team member gets the ball and toss it back to his/her teamate to finish the free throw?

Yes.

Should it be? That's a different question.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by MatthewPV

Player A has the ball ready to throw it in.
(A) Player A bounces the ball, but hits his foot and on the fly crossed over the endline and lands inbounds.
(B) Player A bounces the ball, but hits his foot and bounces twice before crossing the endline.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I'm of the opinion that if the player screws up and loses the ball after having clear control, then that is his fault and he doesn't deserve another chance. I would allow play to continue in case (a), but call a throw-in violation in case (b).

Why would you allow (a) without calling a violation? I'm not completely disagreeing with you, I just need some convincing, maybe with a rulebook or casebook reference. Please.

[wanja]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is an NCAA case ruling which says to stop play and readminister the throw-in. The NFHS doesn't have such a ruling, but does have a very similar one for a FT.

I'd like to see that NFHS case. Can you provide a reference?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by wanja

I'd like to see that NFHS case. Can you provide a reference?

BillyMac just posted it above.

[wanja]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

BillyMac just posted it above.

In the cited free throw case there was no violation in (A) when control was not established. However in (B) control was established and there was a violation. With regard to the original throw in situations, in both A and B the thrower had control, failed to directly pass the ball onto the court and thus violated in both cases

[Nevadaref]

The NFHS FT ruling in part (b) is new as of last season. Prior to that the official was instructed to give it back to him and allow him to attempt the FT.

Why do you state that the thrower has failed to pass the ball directly into the court in both cases? The ball only bounces out of bounds in one of the two cases. In the other case the ball goes directly from the player into the court. That's legal.

[Lotto]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There is an NCAA case ruling which says to stop play and readminister the throw-in.

Here's the NCAA case:

A.R. 175. A1, on a throw-in from a designated spot, fumbles. A1 leaves the designated spot to retrieve the fumble. Is this a violation?

RULING: No. Since there was a fumble, the official shall blow his/ her whistle, which causes the ball to become dead, and then shall re-administer the throw-in. (Rule 4-31.1 and 7-6.5)

And here's an issue I have with this. Suppose that team B is putting a lot of pressure on the throw-in. You reach 4 seconds when A1 fumbles the ball. Doesn't that give an extra advantage to A, who gets a new 5 second count when you re-administer?

Originally Posted by Lotto

Here's the NCAA case:

A.R. 175. A1, on a throw-in from a designated spot, fumbles. A1 leaves the designated spot to retrieve the fumble. Is this a violation?

RULING: No. Since there was a fumble, the official shall blow his/ her whistle, which causes the ball to become dead, and then shall re-administer the throw-in. (Rule 4-31.1 and 7-6.5)

And here's an issue I have with this. Suppose that team B is putting a lot of pressure on the throw-in. You reach 4 seconds when A1 fumbles the ball. Doesn't that give an extra advantage to A, who gets a new 5 second count when you re-administer?

Sounds like a rule the coaches can attempt to hustle us on.
Wondering if the interpretation really means if the thrower fumbles upon receiving the ball & not after it has been in their possession???