Inadvertent Kick on Throw In

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

If dribbling and traveling rules don't apply OOB, what makes you think that deliberately kicking the ball should? Especially when none of those violations are listed as throw-in violations under 9-2? Would you call a thrower for fisting the ball to a teammate in-bounds too?

Yep. I'd also call him for swinging his elbows if he did so.
And you're going to allow him to punt it down the court?

It seems we have what's called an impasse.

Next question, is the rule fundamental #5 the only place that tells us traveling and dribbling rules don't apply to the thrower on a throwin? Or is it written within the rules somewhere?

[Indianaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Next question, is the rule fundamental #5 the only place that tells us traveling and dribbling rules don't apply to the thrower on a throwin? Or is it written within the rules somewhere?

Correct, if they wanted the thrower to be able to kick the ball then #5 would have included that kicking rule does not apply to the thrower on a throwin.

Me think JR is just stirring a conversation, a good thing.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Indianaref

Me think JR is just stirring a conversation, a good thing.

Nope, JR is wondering whether what we're arguing is definitively covered by rule. I'm not sure it is. I'm equally unsure as to whether I'm on the right side of the argument either ..also because I'm unsure if it's definitively covered.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, JR is wondering whether what we're arguing is definitively covered by rule. I'm not sure it is.

It's covered by rule. I'm sure of it. I've already given the citation. Here it is again:

A player shall not travel with the ball, as in 4-44, intentionally kick it, as in 4-29, strike it with the fist or cause it to enter and pass through the basket from below.

NOTE: Kicking the ball is a violation only when it is an intentional act; accidentally striking the ball with the foot or leg is not a violation.

It does not specify an inbounds player, and it does not except a thrower-in. This covers the play definitively.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

It's covered by rule. I'm sure of it. I've already given the citation. Here it is again:


It does not specify an inbounds player, and it does not except a thrower-in. This covers the play definitively.

Just re-read my previous rebuttals, please. Saves me a lot of time.

We disagree.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, JR is wondering whether what we're arguing is definitively covered by rule. I'm not sure it is.

It's sounds like a job for the good ol' 2-3 fallback.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

It's sounds like a job for the good ol' 2-3 fallback.

I'm with scrappy, there's no need for 2-3 here; it's covered by the rules. In the absence of a rule telling me kicked-ball rules don't apply to the thrower on a throwin, it's a violation.

The rule doesn't say the thrower is exempt from all violations not noted in 9-2, it states two specific violations that don't apply "during throwins."

JR's making the same argument some of us made a few years ago with regard to the backcourt violation exceptions; before the NFHS shot us down by telling us that the exceptions noted were all inclusive.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Next question, is the rule fundamental #5 the only place that tells us traveling and dribbling rules don't apply to the thrower on a throwin? Or is it written within the rules somewhere?

6-1. (I thought this was a NOTE, but it's just in the body of the article.)