After all these years - a first!

[Mark Padgett]

As you know, my experience goes back to the Naismith days but I had a situation in last night's 8th grade boys game that was a first for me.

A1 had a habit of "dribbling" the ball whenever he was going to inbound. As long as he kept the ball hitting OOB, he's fine, and he would always grab the ball and inbound within five seconds. In the third quarter, he was doing it again and B1 reached across and hit the ball during one of the dribbles. As I said, I've never had this happen before.

OK you guys, is it just a DOG warning or is it a technical (the same as if B1 hit the ball while A1 was holding it)? My partner was the calling official and he called it a DOG warning. I didn't challenge it and neither did either of the coaches. Were we right or wrong?

[fiasco]

I'm calling a DOG warning in this case.

Rule states it has to be in the player's "possession" to be a T. This is not a dribble, so when the ball is loose, I'm saying he/she doesn't have "possession."

[just another ref]

He may not touch or dislodge the ball while in possession of the thrower. If he is bouncing the ball, he is in possession.

T

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by just another ref

If he is bouncing the ball, he is in possession.

Based on what?

[shavano]

I'm going with DOG warning ( breaking the plane) in this case, Padgett. Mostly because of the age group involved....

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Based on what?

Based on the dictionary definition of "in possession," since there is no rulebook

definition.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by fiasco

Based on what?

Common sense. Are you going to allow B1 to bat the ball away so there's a 5-second violation on A?

Once A has the ball, they "posess" it until it's released on an inbounds pass.

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Common sense. Are you going to allow B1 to bat the ball away so there's a 5-second violation on A?

Once A has the ball, they "posess" it until it's released on an inbounds pass.

What if A1 fumbles the ball on the out of bounds side, then B1 reaches over and touches the ball?

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

What if A1 fumbles the ball on the out of bounds side, then B1 reaches over and touches the ball?

I would still consider him to be in possession.

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Common sense. Are you going to allow B1 to bat the ball away so there's a 5-second violation on A?

No, because if they bat the ball away, I'm blowing my whistle for a DOG warning, so that's not an issue.

We can argue about the semantics of "possession" in this instance, but either way, I'm not calling a T in Mark's OP.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Common sense. Are you going to allow B1 to bat the ball away so there's a 5-second violation on A?

Once A has the ball, they "possess" it until it's released on an inbounds pass.

Agree. My common sense says to use the same basic concept as player control-"holding or dribbling a live ball".

[sseltser]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Agree. My common sense says to use the same basic concept as player control-"holding or dribbling a live ball".

Except he's not holding or dribbling

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Agree. My common sense says to use the same basic concept as player control-"holding or dribbling a live ball".

Except the rules explicitly say that there is no player control on a throw in.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by sseltser

Except he's not holding or dribbling

Rule 4:
ART. 3 . . . The throw-in and the throw-in count begin when the ball is at the disposal of a player of the team entitled to it.
ART. 4 . . . The throw-in count ends when the ball is released by the thrower so the passed ball goes directly into the court.
Would it contribute to the discussion to mention that once the ball is put at the disposal of the thrower, it's technically in his possession until he releases the ball to go into the court?
Anything the defense does to make contact with the ball while on the other side of the line between those two points of time would seem to justify a T, it seems.

[zm1283]

T