Another throw-in question
 

Seeing the thread on the throw-in question reminded me of a question that came up in a rec league referee meeting. NF rules - A1 to inbound on the endline after a basket by team B. A2 is also standing OOB on the endline. A1 passes the ball to A2 - this is legal. However, can A2 then pass the ball back to A1, who is still OOB, to inbound? Assume this all happens within 5 seconds.

Why wouldn't she be allowed to do that? :confused:

echo

That reminds me of something our board's interpreter brought up recently.

Let's keep Mark's scenario, but add an A3 OOB. According to our interpreter, an OOB pass from A1 to A2 is legal, and going back to A1 is okay, but not to a third player that's also OOB on the end line.

Never have I seen such a thing, nor did I bother to look up a citation. Anyone ever hear of this?

Why is it illegal?

7-5-7a

Man, combining that with recent threads, bainsey, methinks your interpreter needs to be impeached by IAABO. He just doesn't have a clue.

Lah me.......:rolleyes:

Hope not. I know the guy.

How did he come up with an obviously wrong answer to something that basic then?

Bill Of Rights ...
 

Not sure that's allowed under our constitution. It's fourteen pages long, so give me time to read up on this to confirm, or deny.

I don't know. This is pre-Gap.

You'll have to aim higher then, JR, because my interpreter got that ruling from someone on a national IAABO level.

We're assuming the case and ruling are being reported correctly. Might not be so.

Bainsey, I have real doubts that anyone at the national IABBO level would ever issue a completely erroneous...and stoopid...ruling like that. They are just too sharp to be doing anything like that.

I doubt very much that anyone at the IAABO national level ever issued anything like that. I know a lot of those guys. I also know quite a few local board interpreters. The great majority are very rules knowledgable imo.

Exactly. And, I've certainly been involved when the "ruling" comes in a large meeting where the original situation mutates somewhat and someone on one seide of the room gets a ruling to the mutation that someone on the other side applies to the original question, and now there's confusion.