Help with 7-1-1

[Rufus]

I'm re-reading my rule book in prep for the coming season and came across 7-1-1:

A player is out of bounds when he/she touches the floor, or any object other than a player/person, on or outside the boundary.

I'm trying to picture how the bolded section plays out. A1 and B1 both scramble for the ball. A1 dives and misses the ball and their momentum carries them out of bounds. B1, who dove after A1 did, secures the ball and lands on top of A1 with no other part of their body touching out of bounds.

Based on the rule citation would B1 be considered out of bounds?

[Adam]

Nope, but I've probably got a foul on B1.

The rule generally comes into play around the benches.

Technically, I think a player could jump in the air, land on the players sitting on the bench, and not be OOB until he/she touches either a seat or the floor.

[M&M Guy]

Think of it this way - the rule prevents an unfair advantage by the defense by simply stepping OOB, and reaching out and touching the offensive player with the ball to then cause the offensive player to now be OOB.

[Rufus]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Think of it this way - the rule prevents an unfair advantage by the defense by simply stepping OOB, and reaching out and touching the offensive player with the ball to then cause the offensive player to now be OOB.

Not to hijack my own post, but aren't you referring to 7-1-2a1 that states a ball is out of bounds when it touches or is touched by a player who is out of bounds?

Snaqs answered my original question and I'm still trying to chew on that one (not that the technical rule interpt is wrong, but rather how I'd explain it to a coach during a game).

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Rufus

Not to hijack my own post, but aren't you referring to 7-1-2(a)1 that states a ball is out of bounds when it touches or is touched by a player who is out of bounds?

Snaqs answered my original question and I'm still trying to chew on that one (not that the technical rule interpt is wrong, but rather how I'd explain it to a coach during a game).

Not exactly; 7-1-2 refers to the ball, while 7-1-1 refers to the player.

If B1 is standing OOB, or even just has 1 foot OOB, they are considered OOB per 4-35-2. Now, if A1, who is holding the ball, happens to touch B1, (or B1 reaches out and touches A1), and the "player/person" exception wasn't in 7-1-1, A1 would be now have caused the ball to go OOB, and would have committed a violation. I believe the exception also prevents a player who may be standing fully inbounds, and accidentally touching a player or coach who is fully OOB, from also committing a violation.

If B1, with one foot OOB, touched the ball while A1 is holding it, B1 would have caused the ball to go OOB, and would be the one to have committed a violation, as per 7-1-2.

[Rufus]

Thanks M&M, that cleared it up.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

I believe the exception also prevents a player who may be standing fully inbounds, and accidentally touching a player or coach who is fully OOB, from also committing a violation.

Corrected the above statement.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Rufus

I'm re-reading my rule book in prep for the coming season and came across 7-1-1:

A player is out of bounds when he/she touches the floor, or any object other than a player/person, on or outside the boundary.

I'm trying to picture how the bolded section plays out. A1 and B1 both scramble for the ball. A1 dives and misses the ball and their momentum carries them out of bounds. B1, who dove after A1 did, secures the ball and lands on top of A1 with no other part of their body touching out of bounds.

Based on the rule citation would B1 be considered out of bounds?

Rufus:

Remember, for the purpose of this rule, the game officials are considered objects.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. But not objects of desire, .

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Rufus:

Remember, for the purpose of this rule, the game officials are considered objects.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. But not objects of desire, .

I disagree. Game officials are persons and may be inadvertently touched while OOB without causing the player's status to become OOB.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Remember, for the purpose of this rule, the game officials are considered objects.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I disagree. Game officials are persons and may be inadvertently touched while OOB without causing the player's status to become OOB.

7.1.1 SITUATION A: A1, while holding the ball inbounds near the sideline,
touches (a) player B1; (b) a photographer; (c) a coach; (d) an official, all of whom
are out of bounds. RULING: A1 is not out of bounds in (a), (b), (c) or (d). To be
out of bounds, A1 must touch the floor or some object on or outside a boundary
line. People are not considered to be objects and play continues. Inadvertently
touching someone who is out of bounds, without gaining an advantage, is not
considered a violation.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

7.1.1 SITUATION A: A1, while holding the ball inbounds near the sideline,
touches (a) player B1; (b) a photographer; (c) a coach; (d) an official, all of whom
are out of bounds. RULING: A1 is not out of bounds in (a), (b), (c) or (d). To be
out of bounds, A1 must touch the floor or some object on or outside a boundary
line. People are not considered to be objects and play continues. Inadvertently
touching someone who is out of bounds, without gaining an advantage, is not
considered a violation.

Thank you Billy and Nevada. I have not perused my rules books and casebooks in a while and really have been paying more attention to baseball rules this summer. I should receive 100 lashes with a wet noodle.

But we still aren't objects of desire, .

MTD, Sr.

[Judtech]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Rufus:

Remember, for the purpose of this rule, the game officials are considered objects.

MTD, Sr.


P.S. But not objects of desire, .

I hate being objectified. But when you look good in polyester pants it is a burden we all must bare

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Judtech

I hate being objectified. But when you look good in polyester pants it is a burden we all must bare

Pleeeease don't say "bare" to Mr. DeNucci...I'd like to keep my breakfast...