The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #30 (permalink)  
Old Wed Jan 06, 2010, 03:08am
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 15,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camron Rust View Post
The clock starting/stopping rules have nothing to do with the rules for what makes a legal throwin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shot from out of bounds on inbound pass hooper Basketball 15 Thu Feb 23, 2006 09:28pm
pass interference out of bounds don't move Football 6 Mon Oct 31, 2005 08:55am
In bounds pass e.g. hoops Basketball 11 Thu Sep 22, 2005 08:38am
In-bounds pass to nobody? whistleblower Basketball 7 Thu Jan 09, 2003 06:24pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:58pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1