No foul on thrower-in at end of game?

[Dennis Bronco]

I am trying to remember if I read about this situation on this forum.
With less than 5 seconds in the fourth quarter and the clock running, A1, whose team is ahead by one point, has the ball for a throw-in. B1 reaches across the plane and either knocks the ball out of A1's hands or fouls A1. I thought the officials were supposed to ignore the fouling attempt (unless it is obviously flagrant) and just let the clock run out. Is that's correct, what is the rule or case? I think the case may be from many years in the past. Thanks much.

[Mark Padgett]

Ya' know, while this sounds like something a coach or maybe Billy Packer might say, I think there actually was a case play about this a while ago.

Of course, I might be thinking of that case book I got from the aliens.

[Adam]

No, the case play says to ignore the "violation" of crossing the plane unless it actually interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throwin. In that case, go directly to technical foul, do not pass Delay of Game Warning.
It says nothing about ignoring an actual foul.
Case play 9.2.10, still in there.

[DesMoines]

Had this play earlier this year. Less than 5 seconds, clock running, so B1 just steps across end line and wraps up thrower.
Tweet. T.
B1 looks at me, shrugs, and says, "What else was I supposed to do?"

[Adam]

Originally Posted by DesMoines

Had this play earlier this year. Less than 5 seconds, clock running, so B1 just steps across end line and wraps up thrower.
Tweet. T.
B1 looks at me, shrugs, and says, "What else was I supposed to do?"

Why the T and not the intentional? Did you go team T or player T?

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Why the T and not the intentional? Did you go team T or player T?

Right:
contacting thrower = INT
contacting ball = T

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Right:
contacting thrower = INT
contacting ball = T

Yep, and crossing the line is simply a Team T (not assessed to the player).

[Mark Padgett]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, the case play says to ignore the "violation" of crossing the plane unless it actually interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throwin. In that case, go directly to technical foul, do not pass Delay of Game Warning.
It says nothing about ignoring an actual foul.
Case play 9.2.10, still in there.

Yep - that's it. Of course, the alien case book says you are supposed to turn the violator into a cereal box, or something like that.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

No, the case play says to ignore the "violation" of crossing the plane unless it actually interferes with the thrower's efforts to make a throwin. In that case, go directly to technical foul, do not pass Delay of Game Warning.
It says nothing about ignoring an actual foul.
Case play 9.2.10, still in there.

I know you're being jocular here, but you don't want to give the impression that you'd skip the DOG warning that must come with the INT/T in this situation.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Dennis Bronco

I am trying to remember if I read about this situation on this forum.
With less than 5 seconds in the fourth quarter and the clock running, A1, whose team is ahead by one point, has the ball for a throw-in. B1 reaches across the plane and either knocks the ball out of A1's hands or fouls A1. I thought the officials were supposed to ignore the fouling attempt (unless it is obviously flagrant) and just let the clock run out. Is that's correct, what is the rule or case? I think the case may be from many years in the past. Thanks much.

Joined 6 years ago but this is your first post? Wow, you're a slow typist.

BTW, it's "thrower," not "thrower-in."

Welcome aboard!

[Dennis Bronco]

BktBallRef-

I'd consider myself more of a "voyeuristic" than a slow typist when it comes to the BB Forum. Having said that and knowing the warped sense of humor that some members have from reading the posts over the last six years, I am prepared for some great comments. I am now going to go back into the shadows for another six years.

In all honesty I have really enjoyed the forum. It has provided a great deal of practical info and very good discussions. Keep up the good work