The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   Throw-in spot (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/56134-throw-spot.html)

tymorton Mon Dec 28, 2009 08:29pm

Throw-in spot
 
A designated throw-in spot is 3 feet wide with no depth limitation.

BillyMac Mon Dec 28, 2009 08:42pm

Who You Gonna Call ??? Mythbusters ...
 
A player inbounding the ball may step on, but not over the line. During a designated spot throwin, the player inbounding the ball must keep one foot on or over the three-foot wide designated spot. An inbounding player is allowed to jump or move one or both feet. A player inbounding the ball may move backward as far as the five-second time limit or space allows. If player moves outside the three-foot wide designated spot it is a violation, not travelling. In gymnasiums with limited space outside the sidelines and endlines, a defensive player may be asked to step back no more than three feet. A player inbounding the ball may bounce the ball on the out-of-bounds area prior to making a throwin.

Mark Padgett Mon Dec 28, 2009 08:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by tymorton (Post 646525)
A designated throw-in spot is 3 feet wide with no depth limitation.

Can anyone join in?

A successful two point shot is worth two points.

OK - your turn. :rolleyes:

Freddy Mon Dec 28, 2009 09:28pm

Omnia Galla...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 646535)
Can anyone join in?

A successful two point shot is worth two points.

OK - your turn. :rolleyes:

All of Gaul is divided into three parts.

(Is it me, or has some sort of alien force taken over our forum over the past several weeks? I think Microsoft has an alien force aversion download component; I'll look into it.)

BktBallRef Mon Dec 28, 2009 11:39pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by tymorton (Post 646525)
A designated throw-in spot is 3 feet wide with no depth limitation.

A dropped slice of toast will always land buttered side down.

bob jenkins Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:24am

Quote:

Originally Posted by tymorton (Post 646525)
A designated throw-in spot is 3 feet wide with no depth limitation.

The cock crows at midnight.

Rich Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:26am

Them bats is smart, they use radar.

These three threads are questions from the Part II exam, BTW.

Back In The Saddle Tue Dec 29, 2009 02:54am

Good things come to those that wait.

chseagle Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:55am

Speaking of throw-ins, I was watching a replay of Seattle University vs. Denver University the other day. Whenever Denver was inbounding the ball it was a 2-person throw-in. 2 players out of bounds, with one OOB player passing it to the other OOB player then passing inbounds.

How often is this actually done?

Nevadaref Tue Dec 29, 2009 04:07am

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646568)
Speaking of throw-ins, I was watching a replay of Seattle University vs. Denver University the other day. Whenever Denver was inbounding the ball it was a 2-person throw-in. 2 players out of bounds, with one OOB player passing it to the other OOB player then passing inbounds.

How often is this actually done?

It is legal following any made goal or awarded goal (The throwing team retains this right if the opponent commits a common foul or violation during the throw-in and the new spot would be along the end line.), but probably only 25% of the time will teams actually have more than one player OOB or even bother to have a single player run the end line.

grunewar Tue Dec 29, 2009 06:00am

Can you believe this?
 
CHSEAGLE actually took this thread, which we so clearly took OT, and tried to make it useful? :eek:

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646568)
Speaking of throw-ins, I was watching a replay of Seattle University vs. Denver University the other day. Whenever Denver was inbounding the ball it was a 2-person throw-in. 2 players out of bounds, with one OOB player passing it to the other OOB player then passing inbounds.

How often is this actually done?

OK, where were we?.....ah yes, "people who live in grass houses shouldn't stow throwns."

chseagle Tue Dec 29, 2009 06:17am

Quote:

Originally Posted by grunewar (Post 646573)
CHSEAGLE actually took this thread, which we so clearly took OT, and tried to make it useful? :eek:

OK, where were we?.....ah yes, "people who live in grass houses shouldn't stow throwns."

I thought the quote was "People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones" LMAO :D

See proof that I'm making an effort to learn :eek:

Speaking of learning, gonna be watching the T-Mobile National Invitational later on today on CBS College Sports.

Concerning the 2 players OOB throw-in, it's covered under 7-5-7a in the rules book.

j51969 Tue Dec 29, 2009 08:41am

"I don't care to belong to a club that accepts people like me as members".

Welpe Tue Dec 29, 2009 10:25am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 646570)
even bother to have a single player run the end line.

I have been a little surprised at the number of teams I've seen that don't seem to know that this is legal.

Mark Padgett Tue Dec 29, 2009 12:13pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 646570)
but probably only 25% of the time will teams actually have more than one player OOB or even bother to have a single player run the end line.

And you almost never see a HS team have a married player run the end line. :p

TimTaylor Tue Dec 29, 2009 01:01pm

"Almost" only counts in horse shoes, hand grenades & atomic bombs......:eek:

j51969 Tue Dec 29, 2009 01:19pm

What if the player were pregnant? T for six in the game, first. A1 is fouled on a try for a goal by pregnant player B1 and B1/2. Is this a multiple foul?

Back In The Saddle Tue Dec 29, 2009 02:59pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by j51969 (Post 646637)
What if the player were pregnant? T for six in the game, first. A1 is fouled on a try for a goal by pregnant player B1 and B1/2. Is this a multiple foul?

But who would shoot the free throws? :eek:

chseagle Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:24pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by j51969 (Post 646637)
What if the player were pregnant? T for six in the game, first. A1 is fouled on a try for a goal by pregnant player B1 and B1/2. Is this a multiple foul?

If the player was pregnant, they'd most likely be in their 1st trimester only, or they didn't know they were pregnant.

Concerning the married player, they would of been emancipated from their parents & were allowed to marry. Also the player could be 18 & just recently married.

Most, if not majority of the time, on an Endline throw-in the player just stands there.

Back In The Saddle Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:31pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646663)
If the player was pregnant, they'd most likely be in their 1st trimester only, or they didn't know they were pregnant.

Concerning the married player, they would of been emancipated from their parents & were allowed to marry. Also the player could be 18 & just recently married.

Most, if not majority of the time, on an Endline throw-in the player just stands there.

You missed it entirely ;)

Mark Padgett Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:32pm

Don't forget, if the fetus was wearing number 1/2, that would be an illegal number and you'd have a technical.

j51969 Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:33pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646663)
If the player was pregnant, they'd most likely be in their 1st trimester only, or they didn't know they were pregnant.

Concerning the married player, they would of been emancipated from their parents & were allowed to marry. Also the player could be 18 & just recently married.

Most, if not majority of the time, on an Endline throw-in the player just stands there.

Whiff..whiff..whiff 3 strikes and YOUR OUT!:D

Welpe Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:33pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646663)
If the player was pregnant, they'd most likely be in their 1st trimester only, or they didn't know they were pregnant.

Yeah but that doesn't answer the question about who would shoot the free throws.

Quote:

Concerning the married player, they would of been emancipated from their parents & were allowed to marry. Also the player could be 18 & just recently married.
That's OK, they can run the endline too.

Adam Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:34pm

Why not?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646663)
1. If the player was pregnant, they'd most likely be in their 1st trimester only, or they didn't know they were pregnant.

2. Concerning the married player, they would of been emancipated from their parents & were allowed to marry. Also the player could be 18 & just recently married.

3. Most, if not majority of the time, on an Endline throw-in the player just stands there.

1. Not necessarily, a woman in my office was going to the gym until a week before she gave birth. Regardless, it still doesn't answer j's question.

2. It's not the impossibility that troubles us, but the rarity.

3. I don't see that often. Normally the player is at least making movements that suggest he's ready to throw the ball. The good news is he's only allowed to stand there for 5 seconds.

j51969 Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:34pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark Padgett (Post 646669)
Don't forget, if the fetus was wearing number 1/2, that would be an illegal number and you'd have a technical.

I missed that T:)

chseagle Tue Dec 29, 2009 03:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by j51969 (Post 646637)
What if the player were pregnant? T for six in the game, first. A1 is fouled on a try for a goal by pregnant player B1 and B1/2. Is this a multiple foul?

If the T is before the shooting foul, any active A player can shoot the FTs. Then A1 would shoot the FT for the foul.

Did A1 make the try?

Also does the 6th player on the court for B have a legal jersey on?

Back In The Saddle Tue Dec 29, 2009 04:04pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646679)
If the T is before the shooting foul, any active A player can shoot the FTs. Then A1 would shoot the FT for the foul.

Did A1 make the try?

Also does the 6th player on the court for B have a legal jersey on?

Ummmm, the "sixth player" is the unborn child. ;)

j51969 Tue Dec 29, 2009 04:07pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by chseagle (Post 646679)
If the T is before the shooting foul, any active A player can shoot the FTs. Then A1 would shoot the FT for the foul.

Did A1 make the try?

Also does the 6th player on the court for B have a legal jersey on?

We are exspecting a physicians note for the player who had concussion a game earlier. He is providing an ultra-sound for the six player concerning the jersey question. Gender will also be determined. What if it's male? Is there a case play for that?

Adam Tue Dec 29, 2009 04:12pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by j51969 (Post 646695)
We are exspecting a physicians note for the player who had concussion a game earlier. He is providing an ultra-sound for the six player concerning the jersey question. Gender will also be determined. What if it's male? Is there a case play for that?

2-3 baby! T's all around. One for each coach just because I like the seat belt.

Oooh, rule change idea! Coach loses ability to request TO with first T, along with losing the coaching box.

BillyMac Tue Dec 29, 2009 06:45pm

Interesting ...
 
The athletes of the WNBA are the best of the best, and their league has a supportive pregnancy policy. Not every athlete is so lucky. Take Darnellia Russell, a high school player in a new documentary about a girls' basketball team from Seattle.

In "The Heart of the Game," directed by Ward Serrill, the Roosevelt High Roughriders are stuck in the losing column until tax professor and novice coach Bill Resler walks into their lives. He gives them permission to be competitive and ruthless on the court allowing the team to thrive. When Darnellia enrolls and walks into the gym, Coach Resler, a father of daughters, smells her talent. The team's wins pile up, even with Darnellia playing most of her junior year pregnant without knowing it.

Darnellia gave birth to her daughter Trekayla in December 2002. When she tried to return to the team as a senior, she had too few academic credits to play because of missed school during her pregnancy. She made up the credits, yet still was denied eligibility under Washington state rules that govern high school athletics -- her pregnancy was not a "hardship," a designation that would allow her to make up the credits and qualify. Darnellia had hoped, through an athletic scholarship, to fulfill her dream of becoming the first in her family to go to college. She had letters of interest from a number of schools before she got pregnant. After the baby the interest pretty much disappeared, and with it, Darnellia's dreams of a college education and maybe even the WNBA.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15am.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1