SO as I understand it, and my understanding is limited to FIBA which says something . . .

If a defender comes out to help and try to draw a charge, if they were to put their foot on the end line/sideline purposefully they would be out of bounds and committing a violation?

My understanding is this is meant for players completely leaving the court; not stepping on the line.

There's no point in stretching 10-3-6 here, just call the violation per rule. We have late whistles on fouls, travels, and even OOB lines all the time. My late whistle does not mean the player was legally OOB; it just means my whistle was late.

Sometimes their time OOB is so short it's almost impossible to call it right away.

This just doesn't apply unless that player is running out a door, down the hall, and back in at the other end of the court.

Running OOB near the court is clear a violation and a violation only. 10-3-6 should not be applied to things already covered in a different rule.

Not at all. What I'm suggesting is that this we need to call this violation every time as soon as is practicable. Yes I understand that occasionally the whistle may be slightly delayed for a variety of reasons, but we shouldn't wait for some perceived advantage - going OOB to avoid a defender or screen is gaining an advantage.

Yes the link to 4-19-14 is tenuous, and I agree that it would be difficult to sell, but it is there. I agree that even late, the violation would be the better call.

Would I T a player for this? No, but I'm not going to wait to see why they left the court either - as soon as I see them illegally OOB I'm going to blow the whistle. This isn't a judgment or advantage/disadvantage call - it's no different than a player with the ball stepping on a boundary line - we should call it every time.

Besides, things were a little dull here and I decided to stir it up a little - looks like it worked! I figured chseagle need a little rest.....:D:D

I did actually have this call result in a T once last season. Player went OOB to get around a defender & I called the violation. His coach stood up and screamed "You're the only two in the gym that know that rule - you're just trying to make us lose!" He got the T.

Bad Tim!

Bad, bad Tim. :D:D

Fwiw, I agree with what you just wrote also.

"Coach, what you player did is a violation. But because I didn't call it immediately, now it's a technical foul."

Sorry Tim but that's makes no sense. More importantly, you're trying to spin and twist the rules to support YOUR interpretation.

9-3-3 - player runs out of bounds for unauthorized reason. Violation.

10.3.2a - The player who has just thrown the ball in on a thowin, stays out of bounds and recieves pass. This is a technical foul.

These two rules/cases happen basically the same way except for the fact that the player recieving the pass is in one case the inbounding player on a thowin. Usually the offensive team is setting up a endline pick play and the offending player is using the pick by running out of bounds. If the player is the inbounder then it is a techincal foul and if it is not on an inbounds play then it is a violation.

Last year in one game, I called it 2 times and my partner once against the same team. The play was set up wrong and it was pretty obvious. The lead would almost get run over by the cutter. Very easy call if you are aware that it is a violation.

The last game I worked I had a situation where there was a battle for the ball and I was trail-becoming lead and I was moving onto the court to view the battle for the ball but then back toward the sidline once the play started to move to the other end and a player was passing me and went outside me and probably out of bounds but I was not going to make that call since he was just trying not to run into me. I will call this an 'authorized reason' for breifly going out of bounds.

With a restraining line...
 

We sort of had this in a game earlier this year, but for us it was a restraining line violation. A1 was behind the end line, but A2 ran inside the restraining line during the throw in.

After that, I stepped out 3 feet and stood so I could also look down the restraining line on in-bounds plays for the rest of the game.

Tiny little gyms in south central Iowa. :D

I grew up in such a gym; 30 miles NE of Des Moines. My first experience as an official with an actual restraining line, however was at a small Baptist school in Des Moines.

I seem to recall a case where that's legal -- and then the defense can cross the restraining line as well.

I think it depends exactly when it happens during the throw-in. By rule, the restraining line is a boundary line until the throw-in crosses the boundary line. At that time the restraining line disappears and the regular boundary line comes back into play. Sound right to you?

Yep....1-2-2.............This restraining line becomes the boundary line during a throw-in on that side or end, as in 7-6. It continues to be the boundary until the ball crosses the line.

Case 7.6.4D(b) (last year's reference, but the case is in this year's book as well)

I looked at that one also but there is no actual restraining line per se in that case play, just an imaginary one set by the official that is 1 step inside the boundary line. They are similar in that you do basically use the one-step estimate as an imaginary restraining/boundary line, and the defense can't break that restraining/boundary line until the ball is released on the throw-in pass.