Throw-in ... Step Over Line

[Richard Ogg]

We've all agreed that on a throw-in, if the inbounder steps over the line it is a violation.

Yesterday I attended the rules interpretation meeting for Northern California, and now I'm not so sure. At that meeting we discussed players who never quite get OOB before throwing the ball. This will be called a violation. However, the only requirement for a legit throw-in is the player be officially OOB. That means if they step on the line, they are good-to-go.

Now I'm thinking about the inbounder that steps over the line, but their other foot is still on the floor OOB. I suspect there is something about breaking the plane, but will have to look in the book later. Thoughts?

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Richard Ogg
We've all agreed that on a throw-in, if the inbounder steps over the line it is a violation.

Yesterday I attended the rules interpretation meeting for Northern California, and now I'm not so sure. At that meeting we discussed players who never quite get OOB before throwing the ball. This will be called a violation. However, the only requirement for a legit throw-in is the player be officially OOB. That means if they step on the line, they are good-to-go.

Now I'm thinking about the inbounder that steps over the line, but their other foot is still on the floor OOB. I suspect there is something about breaking the plane, but will have to look in the book later. Thoughts?

Yes, a player who picks up the ball inbounds, then steps out-of-bounds with only one foot (other foot still on the floor inbounds) is OOB. The player meets the (new) requirement for a throw-in.

But, if the player never lifts the inbounds foot, the player will violate 9-2-11 NOTE. It's still a throw-in violation; the rule editorial change doesn't affect this.

[Tim Roden]

To be legally out of bounds, you need to have one foot on the floor out of bounds. The other foot can dangle over the inbounds area. The rule revision only clarified what we are to do if the player never does go out of bounds before throwing the ball in. We had a vigerous debate on the of these boards and we never got anywhere. I think we had three posible ways of doing it. Some committee member saw it and we can be greatful to him for bringing it up last spring and getting a settled answer on what to do in the situation.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Tim Roden
The rule revision only clarified what we are to do if the player never does go out of bounds before throwing the ball in. We had a vigerous debate on the of these boards and we never got anywhere.

I respectfully disagree. We got directly and concisely to the absolute truth. Most of you, however, simply refused to agree with me

Chuck

[Tim Roden]

Vigerous debate is all we need to leave it at.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

I respectfully disagree. We got directly and concisely to the absolute truth. Most of you, however, simply refused to agree with me

Chuck

Which is how we got to the absolute truth.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Which is how we got to the absolute truth.

Hmmmmmm, I seem to remember hearing somewhere that a little thing called the -- what is it again? oh yeah -- the rulebook clearly, concisely and absolutely agrees with me!!

Chuck

[RecRef]

Originally posted by Richard Ogg
We've all agreed that on a throw-in, if the inbounder steps over the line it is a violation.

Snip

Now I'm thinking about the inbounder that steps over the line, but their other foot is still on the floor OOB. I suspect there is something about breaking the plane, but will have to look in the book later. Thoughts?

No, there is no plane violation to this. 9.2.5 RB states that the ball can not be “Carried Onto” the court. In the CB it states “steps through the plane of the boundry line ‘And Touches’ the court.” You are not on the court until you touch it.

If someone has a copy of the Simplified and Illustrated I believe that there is a illustration that shows that there is no violation.

[AK ref SE]

What ever happened to advantage/disadvantage. If it is just me and the inbounder, I myself will not be looking as hard at it. If it is close I will probable tell the player, make sure you get out of bounds......now if there is a press or pressure...i will be looking at it a lot harder.

AK ref SE

[Bart Tyson]

Originally posted by Richard Ogg
We've all agreed that on a throw-in, if the inbounder steps over the line it is a violation.

Hmmmm not sure i agree. Oooo what the heck, I disagree.

[Andy]

Originally posted by AK ref SE
What ever happened to advantage/disadvantage. If it is just me and the inbounder, I myself will not be looking as hard at it. If it is close I will probable tell the player, make sure you get out of bounds......now if there is a press or pressure...i will be looking at it a lot harder.

AK ref SE

Not to change the subject, but advantage/disadvantage is only referred to in the rulebook in the context of a foul. Violations such as traveling, carrying the ball, and inbound violations are not subject to advantage/disadvantage, but should be whistled anytime they occur.

[Bart Tyson]

I agree with Andy to the point where the game has been decided. i.e. Score 50-30 with 3min. left the it is clear the game is decided.

[Edited by Bart Tyson on Oct 15th, 2002 at 03:20 PM]

[AK ref SE]

Andy-

i do not agree that advantage/disadvantage only pertains to fouls....if a player is cominig up the court no pressure....knowone with in 30 feet....he/she carries the ball I will probably let it go, there was no advantage or disadvantage

[Bart Tyson]

As long as you call it a no call the rest of the game.

[Andy]

Originally posted by AK ref SE
Andy-

i do not agree that advantage/disadvantage only pertains to fouls....if a player is cominig up the court no pressure....knowone with in 30 feet....he/she carries the ball I will probably let it go, there was no advantage or disadvantage

I understand your point, but you do not have authority or justification from the rulebook to not call a violation simply because a player is all alone. If this same player picked up the ball and ran around in a circle with no other players within 30 feet of him, would you not call a travel? Just something to think about.