The correct mechanic is the former, but I would guess that most people incorrectly do the latter. Of course, that doesn't make it right.

So what is your point--that most people do this wrong?

In regard to timing the situation, it is no different from A1 making a throw-in pass from behind the end line which is first touched by A2 at the division line while he has one foot touching OOB.

I am in the group that incorrectly does it. Why is it proper in this situation to chop the time in when the ball becomes dead?

Because the rule, 5-9-4, states that the clock shall be restarted when the ball is legally touched by a player on the court. That player can be either inbounds or out-of-bounds. The clock should start on that touching and then stop as soon as the official blows the whistle for the violation. Never starting it isn't proper according to the rule.

Where is the definition of "on the court" other than 4-13 Court Areas, which clearly does not include out of bounds.

9-2-2 "...is touched by another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court..."

:D

I've always had the thinking that the clock only starts either when I see the ball is inbounds with player dribbling or passing, or the official says to start the clock.

No offense, but that's because you aren't an official and don't know much about the rules.

Here is the relevant passage for your edification:

RULE 5,SECTION 9 RE-STARTING THE CLOCK
ART. 1 . . . After time has been out, the clock shall be started when the official
signals time-in. If the official neglects to signal, the timer is authorized to start the
clock as per rule, unless an official specifically signals continued time-out.
ART. 2 . . . If play is started or resumed by a jump, the clock shall be started
when the tossed ball is legally touched.
ART. 3 . . . If a free throw is not successful and the ball is to remain live, the
clock shall be started when the ball touches or is touched by a player on the court.
ART. 4 . . . If play is resumed by a throw-in, the clock shall be started when the
ball touches, or is legally touched by, a player on the court after it is released by
the thrower.

I've been watching the officials more so since I started posting on here. So I'm slowly learning to not always do what I think I know is right to doing as instructed.

I used to have more a trigger finger when it came to starting/stopping the clock, but have slowed that down to wait for the signal.

9-2-2 deals with the throw-in provisions exclusively. The above statement is one of the requirements necessary to avoid this violation only. If the player in question who touches the ball is out of bounds, this is a violation in 9-3-2, which also deals with the throw-in pass. This tells me that the ball was not "legally touched."

Yep, and we are discussing a throw-in play.
True.
And you would be incorrect about that as well. :(


2007-08 Basketball Rules Interpretations

SITUATION 3: During an alternating-possession throw-in for Team A, thrower A1 passes the ball directly on the court where it contacts (a) A2 or (b) B2, while he/she is standing on a boundary line. RULING: Out-of-bounds violation on (a) A2; (b) B2. The player was touched by the ball while out of bounds, thereby ending the throw-in. The alternating-possession arrow is reversed and pointed toward Team B's basket when the throw-in ends (when A2/B2 is touched by the ball). A throw-in is awarded at a spot nearest the out-of-bounds violation for (a) Team B; (b) Team A. (4-42-5; 6-4-4; 9-2-2; 9-3-2)

Nevada, you're so far in left field its funny. You're citing rules that have nothing at all to do with how/when the clock starts. For you "on the court" definition, how about you cite the rule on LGP that inidicates that "on the court" means inbounds? That would be equally relevant. :rolleyes:

The clock starting/stopping rules have nothing to do with the rules for what makes a legal throwin.

If the initial contact is also simultaneous with a violation, the correct procedure, if both the throw-in and violation are being covered by the same officials, is for the official to whistle and indicate by keeping the hand raised that the ball has become dead and the clock should not start. It is just plain dumb to chop time in after you see a violation as the ball is already dead. Why would you start the clock after a violation?

I do not believethat to be the correct reference to use. 9.2.2 would indicate that is a legal throw in, but the violation occurs because the player is now out of bounds.

I believe the correct rule to look at would be 9-2-3, which indicates the thrown ball shall not be touched by a teammate of the thrower while the ball is on the out-of-bounds side of the throw-in boundary-line plane (i.e. an illegal touch).

Just read this thread ...
 

Yup ... the whole thing. I'm really quite tired now. For our next topic, could we take up something simple like relationships between men and women, or maybe memorizing Pi to a million digits.

Your condescending tone is unbecoming, even when you're right.

In this case, I agree with Camron. Nothing you quote here supports your position.

Actually, it does. The point that I was trying to make is that the touching by the player whether he is inbounds or out of bounds is a legal touching. It is the location of that touching which is illegal and the cause of the violation. This is very different from the first contact being a kick or punch of the ball.

The reason that this concept is relevant to the clock/timing rules is that in 2007-08 the NFHS added the word "legally" to BOTH the rule on how a throw-in ends (4-42-5) AND the rule when the clock starts following a throw-in (5-9-4).

As we know this was done primarily because of the AP arrow. By adding the word "legally" to 4-42-5, the NFHS made it so that an illegal touch (kick, fist, etc.) did not cause the throw-in to end, and thus would not reverse the arrow. By adding the word "legally" the NFHS also made it so that the clock would not start in these situations. However, on a legal touching the throw-in ends, the arrow is reversed, and the clock would start as that is exactly what the wording of the rule says.

That same season the NFHS published a few play rulings to clarify what constituted legal touchings and what did not. It was made clear that a player standing OOB and touching the ball in an otherwise legal manner (not kicking it or striking it with a fist) had contacted the ball "legally" causing the throw-in to end and committed an OOB violation. This was the play ruling which I cited for the two of you. With it I was making the point to you that if one follows the logic behind the NFHS rulings, one will conclude that the clock does not start on illegal touchings, but does on legal touchings. Therefore, although play may be immediately whistled dead and the clock stopped, it still should be started on the touch.

In short, if you would reverse the arrow if the throw-in were an AP throw-in, then you should start the clock on the touching, but if the touching would prevent the AP arrow from being reversed, then the clock should not start on the play.