Kobe Bryant behind backboard basket

[RefItUp]

Originally Posted by mbyron

The NBA has rules?

My point exactly; I can't stand watching the NBA at time; the officials aren't really even refereeing the game.

[APG]

It would seem that it should of been a violation. Directly from the 2009-2010 rule book:

Rule 8, Section II:

b. Any ball that rebounds or passes directly behind the backboard, in either direction, from any point is considered out-of-bounds.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

It would seem that it should of been a violation. Directly from the 2009-2010 rule book:

Rule 8, Section II:

b. Any ball that rebounds or passes directly behind the backboard, in either direction, from any point is considered out-of-bounds.

If that's the rule, it was called correctly. The ball seemed to be near the edge of the lane when it left his hand, which would mean that it was not "directly behind the backboard."

The relevant provision for NFHS is 7-1-2:
"The ball is out of bounds:
b. When it passes over a rectangular backboard."

I was taught that this means "directly over," which seems equivalent to the NBA rule (or, if you like, the "NBA rule").

[APG]

Originally Posted by mbyron

If that's the rule, it was called correctly. The ball seemed to be near the edge of the lane when it left his hand, which would mean that it was not "directly behind the backboard."

The relevant provision for NFHS is 7-1-2:
"The ball is out of bounds:
b. When it passes over a rectangular backboard."

I was taught that this means "directly over," which seems equivalent to the NBA rule (or, if you like, the "NBA rule").

Ball certainly looked like it went directly behind the backboard to me. Am I missing something? I've seen balls travel the exact same trajectory except it went over due to a missed shot and seen it called out of bounds at all levels, not just the NBA, and that's how I've called it in all my games.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Ball certainly looked like it went directly behind the backboard to me. Am I missing something?

His right foot seems to be on the lane line, and the ball over his head.

The lane is 12' wide (or 14'? I don't know NBA dimensions), and the backboard is only 6' wide. So the ball left his hand approximately 3' to the side of the backboard, and thus not directly behind it.

[BillyMac]

Happened right down the street in Hartford, CT. The Celtics use to play a few regular season games here each year, when the Hartford Civic Center (now XL Center) had a larger capacity than the old Boston Garden.

Yahoo! Video Detail for Larry Bird hits an incredible behind the backboard shot

[mendi]

"With the new rules, as long as the shot is not made directly behind the entire length of the backboard, a converted shot will count."

???

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by mendi

"With the new rules, as long as the shot is not made directly behind the entire length of the backboard, a converted shot will count."

???

We don't have very many NBA rules experts here, so there's no answer (yet) as to whether the announcer was correct (the shot was legal) or not.

In FED and NCAA, it would be a violation.

That said, it might have been missed. :shrug:

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by mbyron

..... which seems equivalent to the NBA rule (or, if you like, the "NBA rule").

Actually, the NBA "rule" seems to be the correct punctuation.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett

Actually, the NBA "rule" seems to be the correct punctuation.

I see your point. However, your use of scare quotes calls into question only the existence of such rules, not of the "association" itself.