The Official Forum  

Go Back   The Official Forum > Basketball

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:15pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Throw In Contact

A1 drives to the basket and scores a lay up. However, he falls to the ground and slides to the wall. B2 picks up the ball and begins the throw in. Meanwhile A1 is still getting up from the floor from his layup. A1 contacts B2 as he gets up from the floor and turns around causing B2 to:

1) Lose the ball for the throw in
2) Fall either onto the court or not

What do you have?
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:17pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDurham View Post
A1 drives to the basket and scores a lay up. However, he falls to the ground and slides to the wall. B2 picks up the ball and begins the throw in. Meanwhile A1 is still getting up from the floor from his layup. A1 contacts B2 as he gets up from the floor and turns around causing B2 to:

1) Lose the ball for the throw in
2) Fall either onto the court or not

What do you have?
Depends...was the contact intentional or inadvertent.
__________________
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons - for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup!
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:20pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor View Post
Depends...was the contact intentional or inadvertent.
It was purely accidental. However, if it causes B2 to a disadvantage it has to be something. But would it fall under the automatic "Intentional" for contacting the player throwing the ball in?
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:36pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Without having a chance to check the book, my first thought is intentional for the reasoning you cite. OTOH, I'm not sure this play is what the rule was intended to cover.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:38pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
The intentional foul penalty in this situation refers specifically to an opponent who reaches through the boundary plane and fouls the thrower. This is clearly not the case here.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:42pm
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Toledo, Ohio, U.S.A.
Posts: 8,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDurham View Post
A1 drives to the basket and scores a lay up. However, he falls to the ground and slides to the wall. B2 picks up the ball and begins the throw in. Meanwhile A1 is still getting up from the floor from his layup. A1 contacts B2 as he gets up from the floor and turns around causing B2 to:

1) Lose the ball for the throw in
2) Fall either onto the court or not

What do you have?

As I right this response, there have only been three posts to your question. What I am about to say is how I handle such situations. If a player goes down in the manner that you have described A1 doing, I am inclined to stop play with my whistle and make sure that A1 can continue to play. I know that if a player was moving fast enough when he hit the floor to slide in the the wall like your describe, then he just might be slightly shaken up to say the least. This is just me, because I know that I have wear the med-alert that is advertised on late night television where the "mature" person yells: "Help I've fallen and I can't get up."

MTD, Sr.
__________________
Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
Trumbull Co. (Warren, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Wood Co. (Bowling Green, Ohio) Bkb. Off. Assn.
Ohio Assn. of Basketball Officials
International Assn. of Approved Bkb. Officials
Ohio High School Athletic Association
Toledo, Ohio
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:43pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by just another ref View Post
The intentional foul penalty in this situation refers specifically to an opponent who reaches through the boundary plane and fouls the thrower. This is clearly not the case here.
But to argue the matter. What is the difference in reaching through the plane and fouling and being "in the plane" and fouling. Both instances involve the player coming into the "plane space" and fouling. I just saw the play today, though no contact occurred when A1 got up.
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:44pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 1,273
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDurham View Post
It was purely accidental. However, if it causes B2 to a disadvantage it has to be something. But would it fall under the automatic "Intentional" for contacting the player throwing the ball in?
Agree with just another ref - it doesn't fit the intentional definition. If it was purely accidental, I'd probably just blow the whistle and give it back to B for a throw in (can run the endline).
__________________
Meddle not in the affairs of dragons - for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

Last edited by TimTaylor; Sat Dec 18, 2010 at 11:46pm.
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:46pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor View Post
Agree with just another ref - it doesn't fit the intentional definition. If it was purely accidental, I'd probably just blow the whistle and give it back to A for a throw in (can run the endline).
I agree with not fitting the intentional, but in my previous post I can see the other side also. However, it has to be something if it causes a disadvantage and I don't know if what you described would work IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:47pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor View Post
Agree with just another ref - it doesn't fit the intentional definition. If it was purely accidental, I'd probably just blow the whistle and give it back to B for a throw in (can run the endline).
While I can agree with not going intentional, I don't think you can just go with a do-over. Call the common foul. Being clumsy may not be illegal, but it also doesn't absolve the new defender from responsibility for the contact.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #11 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:48pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 346
I agree with Mark. Play should be stopped and and the throw in restarted with end line privileges, unless you deem the act was truly intentional.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:49pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
While I can agree with not going intentional, I don't think you can just go with a do-over. Call the common foul. Being clumsy may not be illegal, but it also doesn't absolve the new defender from responsibility for the contact.
So a common foul can be called for contact on the other side of the throw in plane?
Reply With Quote
  #13 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:50pm
Adam's Avatar
Keeper of the HAMMER
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: MST
Posts: 27,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by CDurham View Post
So a common foul can be called for contact on the other side of the throw in plane?
Why not?
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners.
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:52pm
We don't rent pigs
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,627
Quote:
Originally Posted by TimTaylor View Post
If it was purely accidental, I'd probably just blow the whistle and give it back to B for a throw in (can run the endline).
I don't see how you could do that. If A1 accidentally contacts B1 in the process of getting up and reentering the court, I see no reason why you couldn't have a common foul. If he tries to make a play and contacts the thrower, I think you could go with the intentional, no matter where A1 was standing when the contact occurred.
__________________
I swear, Gus, you'd argue with a possum.
It'd be easier than arguing with you, Woodrow.


Lonesome Dove
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old Sat Dec 18, 2010, 11:53pm
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 266
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaqwells View Post
Why not?
I'm not disagreeing I have just never seen it. Which again doesnt mean it can't happen. In my mind, I guess from case plays of a player "reaching in" and fouling the throw inner results in an Intentional Foul, I am thinking it can only by intentional.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When is hair contact a contact? OmniSpiker Volleyball 6 Tue Nov 04, 2008 06:27pm
contact/violation during free throw refnjoe Basketball 15 Thu Jan 25, 2007 08:42am
illegal contact during Free Throw? ysong Basketball 5 Thu Nov 11, 2004 10:20am
Throw-In Contact bwbuddy Basketball 16 Sat Nov 08, 2003 10:35am


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:20pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1