Possesion Arrow Error
 

We had a Jump ball call. The Possesion Arrow was pointed to team A. The ball was rewarded to Team A, and inbounded. Team B then Fouls Team A on a shot attempt. When the Official goes and reports the foul, he is told that Team B should have gotten possesion on the Jump Ball. What is the Correct Ruling in this Case.

Play on, once the throwin pass is completed (touched inbounds), it's too late to correct.

There fixed it for ya! :)

Once the throw-in has ended, it's too late to correct.

Team B gets the next AP.

Welcome to the forum!

"Team B gets two of the next three." :eek:

Beat me to it. LOL

MTD, Sr.

recently heard this happened at a local VB game. 3 mins left in game, V team scores and calls a timeout. Coming out of timeout H team is slow, V team player steps out of bounds for the throw-in. Offical gives player the ball and he throws it in and his teammate makes an uncontested 3. As soon as the V team completed the throw-in V coach is in officials ear telling him it is not correctable. After V team makes the 3, H coach realizes what happened and is somewhat upset. Other official T's him. H team lost by 5.

What's an 11-letter word beginning with "cluster"?

Oh Oh! I know!

Which "him" got the T? The V coach or the H coach?

Even it is not correctable, it is T'able. The fact that the coach said something the moment it was inbounds indicates they did it on purpose. That is an unsporting T.

The only case play that is close is the one where the scoring team deliberate takes the ball OOB (when it should be the other team's ball) and throws it in. But that is close enough for me. They're going to lose that 3 pointer (it was a dead ball), give up 2 FTs and the ball.

The H coach had every right to be pissed. The officials gave the other team the ball incorrectly at the end of the game when likely had a big impact. I'd give him a very long leash on that one.

I'm with Camron...

...sounds pre-meditated to me...WHACK!

Cameron,
I agree with your line of thinking as far as T-ing up the V coach, but wouldn't the three pointer have to count by rule because the reff handed the v player the ball and the throwin was legally completed?

The case play Camron is referring to.

A SPECIFIC UNSPORTING ACT
10.1.8 SITUATION: Immediately following a goal or free throw by Team A, A1 inbounds the ball to A2 and A2 subsequently throws the ball through A's basket.
RULING: The following procedure has been adopted to handle this specific situation if it is recognized before the opponents gain control or before the next throw-in begins: (a) charge Team A with a technical foul; (b) cancel the field goal; (c) cancel any common foul(s) committed and any nonflagrant foul against A2 in the act of shooting; and (d) put “consumed” time back on the clock.
COMMENT: If there is no doubt the throw-in was a result of confusion, the entire procedure would be followed except no technical foul would be charged. This procedure shall not be used in any other throw-in situation in which a mistake allows the wrong team to inbound the ball.

Thanks BBRF, sorry Cameron, see the whole picture now.

the difference is, in the OP, the wrong team wouldn't have gotten a throw-in without the ref's complicity. In the case play, it's following a made basket so the ref never touches the ball.

The throwin can't be corrected but the 3-pointer was made AFTER the throwin was completed. They effectively shot a dead ball...even if it took a moment for the official to realize what just happened.

An "Uncorrectable Error" due to the lack of focus of the crew! These are the things that become second nature with experience....You must observe so much more than just the action of the game.

Case book play 6.4.1SitD plainly states in the RULING "Once the throw-in ends - it is too late to change anything."

NFHS rule 6-1-2(b) says the ball was live on the throw-in when it was at the disposal of the player. By rule 6-7-1, the ball remained live until the 3-pointer was made.

Unfortunately we have no rules backing to take away that made 3-pointer. It might not be fair bit it it is correct, by rule. The officials just have to live with their screw-up.

FWIW, I don't necessarily agree. In this play, the official administers the throw-in to the thrower for the wrong team. In the case play, the wrong team takes the ball after the made basket and inbounds it. Finally, the case play says, "This procedure shall not be used in any other throw-in situation in which a mistake allows the wrong team to inbound the ball."

A SPECIFIC UNSPORTING ACT
10.1.8 SITUATION: Immediately following a goal or free throw by Team A, A1 inbounds the ball to A2 and A2 subsequently throws the ball through A's basket.
RULING: The following procedure has been adopted to handle this specific situation if it is recognized before the opponents gain control or before the next throw-in begins: (a) charge Team A with a technical foul; (b) cancel the field goal; (c) cancel any common foul(s) committed and any nonflagrant foul against A2 in the act of shooting; and (d) put “consumed” time back on the clock.
COMMENT: If there is no doubt the throw-in was a result of confusion, the entire procedure would be followed except no technical foul would be charged. This procedure shall not be used in any other throw-in situation in which a mistake allows the wrong team to inbound the ball.

JR,
That was why I asked my original question. This OP was different because the reff "made" the ball live by handing the ball to the player. And we know once the throwin is complete, its not changeable. In the comment section of the case play the, "If there is no doubt the throw-in was a result of confusion" I took this to mean that the "confusion" can also be with the reff versus the players. In the OP the players and coach intentionally "confuse" the reff, couldn't one use this to say that this is not covered by rule and thus wipe the made 3 away?

How is it not covered by rule when the case play specifically states,

"This procedure shall not be used in any other throw-in situation in which a mistake allows the wrong team to inbound the ball."

This case play fits the situation:

THROW-IN BY WRONG TEAM BY MISTAKE
7.5.2 SITUATION B: Team A is awarded a throw-in near the division line. The administering official by mistake, puts the ball at B1's disposal. B1 completes the throw-in and Team B subsequently scores a goal. RULING: No correction can be made for the mistake by the official.

All true, but at that point, the 3-pointer in question hasn't even been attempted yet. Sure you can't change anything (relative to that throwin), but it doesn't say you can't call something else. If you're going to call an unsporting T for the team deliberately pulling such a stunt, the team will be shooting such a dead ball. This sort of deception and trickery is, without a doubt, unsportsmanlike and is quite different than a player from team B believing it was their ball. It is no different than the barking dog play antics that the NFHS has clearly indicated is not in the spirit of the game.

I'd have a hard time issuing a T for this when the official handed them the ball.

If you call an unsporting "T" before the 3-point attempt is made, of course you can disallow the 3-pointer by rule. The ball was dead on the whistle for the "T". However, you have no rules justication that I know of that will let you disallow the 3-pointer after it was made.

Unsporting "T"s are usually a judgment call......and judgment varies from official to official.

Wonder what would have happened if Resumption of Play procedure had been used? Could a T have been issued when V coach said it was too late for the DOG violation/technical for reaching through the plane and touching the ball? Just playing Agitator's Advocate here.

As you know, the whistle rarely makes the ball dead. It is just an indication that the ball is dead and has been since the point of the infraction. A late whistle doesn't change that fact.

The point at which I think about whether the situation should or should not be a T will be the point the ball became dead, not when I finally put air in the whistle.

You have no rules justification for that statement that I'm aware of. The ball is not dead either when you decide a "T" should be called or when you blow your whistle IF a shot is already in the air. That's NFHS rule 6-7-5 + EXCEPTION a.

If you haven't decided to call the "T" or had not blown your whistle before the ball left the shooter's hands on the 3-point attempt, you have no rules justication that I know of to then cancel the 3-point basket if it goes. The ball is live until the try is made or missed.

No one said the ball was already in the air.

SECTION 7 DEAD BALL
The ball becomes dead, or remains dead, when:
ART. 7 . . . A foul (other than player-control) occurs (see exception below)

.

The whistle only makes the ball dead when it is not preceded by something that already made it dead.

The point of the infraction is what matters, not when the official decides to blow the whistle or actually blows the whistle.

Camron, that's the statement that I've been commenting on. By rule, the player only shot a dead ball if the official had decided to call the technical foul before the ball left the shooter's hands.

I agree that the official can decide to call an unsporting foul on this play. That is always a judgment call. But the ball is still live after the throw-in until the official decides to call that technical foul. And additionally, if the ball is in the air on a 3-point try when the official decides to call the unsporting "T", then the technical foul call does not make the ball dead by rule.

We can't retroactively declare the ball dead. We have to follow the rules. That was my point.

Disagree. When the referee decides to call the foul or actually blows the whistle is irrelevant. The time of the act that the referee determines is a foul, even if it takes a second or two for the referee to decide, is the time the ball becomes dead. That is a pretty basic fundamental of the rules and I'm surprised you're even suggesting otherwise. The infraction itself makes the ball dead at the time of the infraction. The referee is only confirming the fact.

Otherwise, having a patient whistle could open up some very undesirable situations....

A1 travels and then immediately collides with B1 for what would be an obvious block or charge. The referee then decides that the travel came first. If the ball remains live until the whistle is blown, are you calling the travel and the foul?

A2 fouls B1 just before A1 releases a shot. The referee decides it was a foul and blows the whistle just after A1 released the shot. It was clear that A2 fouled before the release. Does the shot count since the referee didn't decide/blow until after the release?

A1, not yet in the shooting motion, is fouled by B1 and then runs into B3 for either an obvious block or a charge (doesn't really matter which for the purposes of this discussion) all before you can make a judgement and blow the whistle for the first contact. Are you saying that the rules support the ball remaining live after the first contact/foul such that the second contact is also subject to a common foul. Or is the ball dead on the first contact?

Let's go back to Square One....

See above.....

By rule, the ball was live on the throw-in as soon as it was at the disposal of the thrower. The ball was still live after the throw-in ended. Once the throw-in ended, it was too late by rule to go back and change anything.

They then effectively would shoot a dead ball by rule ONLY if the official had called a technical foul...or had decided to call a technical foul and had not blown the whistle for it yet ... BEFORE the shot left the shooter's hand. If the official decided to call a technical foul after the shot was in the air, by rule the ball remains live until the shot is made or missed.

That was my point.

I don't presume to speak for Camron, but I think his point is this. Is a technical foul different from a personal foul? The action which caused the foul is what causes the ball to become dead, not the official's decision to make the call, and not the whistle.

Exactly....and it is a pretty basic rule.

The dead ball rule doesn't differentiate between types of foul....just that a foul, when it occurs, makes the ball dead (with exceptions for continuous motion and a try already in the air). The whistle only causes the ball to become dead when it is not for an infraction or not already dead for an infraction.

Basketball rules fundamental....

16. The official’s whistle seldom causes the ball to become dead (it is already dead).

In this case, the infraction, when it is committed, causes the ball to become dead immediately, not the whistle itself nor after the after the time it takes for the official to recognize the infraction. If the shot is not in the air when the foul occurs, it can not count. In this case, the foul clearly occurred before the try was in the air.

No matter how many times you say "by rule", it will not change what the rule actually says.

How are you saying "by rule"? The rules do not support what you are saying. The ball becomes dead when the foul occurs not when the official decides to call it.

Tell Camron that.

Sigh....

Back to Square 1 again....so there is absolutely no confusion.

The correct ruling in this case is that the play stands as written.Team A will shoot the free throws for the foul on the shot attempt and team B will get the arrow.

Nothing that happened above can be changed by rule. And the pertinent rules and case plays have already been cited.

And my point is that in the OP there was absolutely nothing that occurred that would make the ball dead before the foul call. And if the attempted shot where the foul occurred went in, it would have counted.

I was also agreeing that a technical foul being called before the shot attempt would also make the ball dead.

I have no idea how we got seem to have gotten so far off track from that.

The call is not what makes the ball dead. It is when the foul occurs. When did it occur in this case? The team used devious methods to accept a throw-in to which it was not entitled. The ball was dead when they threw it in. No basket.

Say what?

Howinthehell can the ball be dead on the throw-in if there NEVER was a whistle? There NEVER was a technical foul called. There was NO whistle for a technical foul EVER.

You have absolutely no rules justification to state that the ball was dead. And if you think differently, cite a rule to back it up.

Did you even bother to read case book play 6.4.1SitD?

That's ridiculous!

Are you blind or just playing dumb?

The rule AND the rule fundamental have been cited, both of which clearly refute your assertion that it takes the whistle to actually make the ball dead.

The case you're citing has NOTHING to do with a a foul, much less an unsportsmanlike foul. It refers to a simple throwin mistake in isolation.

Once again, when the official decides to call an unsportsmanlike technical foul and/or blows the whistle, the ball is retroactively dead to the time of the act that drew the technical foul. Rule 6-7-7 (note the word "occurs") and rule fundamental 16.

So, Camron, what you are basically saying is that you would have handled the updated scenario stated earlier in the thread in this way:

V throws ball in, shoots and makes a three pointer. H Coach jumps up and yells "Hey, wait a minute..." You then realize that V should not have had the throw-in, decide they did it purposely, and then take the three points off the board/out of the scorebook, and assess a T on the V Coach.

Is that really what you are saying here?

No. I'm addressing the situation here.....

...where is becomes apparent that V knew exactly what they were doing. I consider that unsportsmanlike. Without that, you have no indication that it was anything but confusion.

You really don't know that it was not confusion on the players part, and a Coach who just happens to know the rule that says once the throw-in is completed it is too late to fix it...player is confused, coach recognized what was happening...so you are guessing that the Coach set it all up during the time-out?

+1

How many teams really don't know who's ball it is coming out of a timeout...particularly the coach? For him to KNOW that it shouldn't have been his throwin at all and be that quick on the ruling, you're pretty gullible if you think it was all a big coincidence. Either the coach doesn't know or he does. He's not going to be ignorant of what is going on (thinking it is their ball) until the very moment the ball is touched inbounds and brilliant in recognizing that instant that it should have been the other team's ball and it is too late to correct the throwin.

The post said the H team was slow coming out of the break...I have seen it before that the other team then steps up thinking it's their ball and have to be told to get out of there. So have you...in this case, the officials didn't catch it.

So when you decide to hit the whistle after the throw-in and T the V coach, you will then have to answer some pretty pointed questions...like "If you knew it wasn't their throw-in, why didn't you kill it before they threw it in?" and "Once you screwed up and let the wrong team throw it in, what magic crystal ball did you use to decide that the Coach and players did it on purpose?"

And the rules basis you have quoted so far will NOT help you in answering those questions from your Assignor and Board members...

And I don't give a rat's azz if you consider that as unsportsmanlike or not. My point was and is that you have NO rules basis to void either that throw-in or the 3-point basket basket. And if you or JAR think differently, then cite a rule....any rule.

Even though the officials screwed up, it was still a legal throw-in made with a live ball and nothing occurred under the rules to make the ball dead until after the 3-point basket scored.

The rules have been cited several times. The ball becomes dead when the foul occurs. The foul occurred before the throw in. At that point the ball became dead.

I really don't see why you are arguing this...this is a fundamental. The ball becomes dead when the foul occurs not when the official makes the call.

I'm not at all certain about the technical call in this case, but that is a given here, and not part of this particular debate.

Change it up. A1 has a throw-in under B's basket. B1 reaches across the line, takes the ball out of A1's hands, and quickly dunks. The official then sounds the whistle and signals the technical foul. Does the basket count?

Oh boy...so again I will ask...ball is thrown-in. V shoots and makes a 3 pointer. H Coach then jumps and yells "Hey! Wait a minute..." and you realize that your crew just screwed up and you think that that d@mn V coach did it all on purpose. So you then 1)Wipe off the made 3 pointer and take it out of the book and 2) assess the T on the V Coach because - since you absolutely KNOW all the way down to your toes that he did it on purpose - the ball should have been dead before it was thrown in since that's when the Unsport. T happened...

Is that REALLY what you are going to do? Really and for true?:eek:

Bad comparison...in this case, there was no mistake by the Officials...in allowing the wrong team the throw-in, there is. Apples and donkeys.

Let me go on the record on this one too from a rules standpoint.

-the awarding of a throw-in to the wrong team was an is an official's error
-as soon as the official administering the throw-in gave the thrower the ball, the ball became live(rule 6-1-2b)
-the throw-in ended when a V player on the court legally touched the ball(rule 4-42-5a)
- the 3-point shot counts because it was made with a live ball ( rule 5-1-1)

Once the throw-in ended, it was too late to change anything, including giving the wrong team the ball for the throw-in(case book play 6.4.1SitD) or voiding the made 3-point shot. You administer the 2 free throws for the technical foul on the H coach and give the V the ball for the throw-in.

And if anyone disagrees with that, please cite RULES to support your stance.

You conveniently left out the foul that occurred.

What freaking foul? There was NO foul before the throw-in. And if you think differently, go back to post #6 of this thread and point a foul out to me. The ONLY foul that was called in that situation was a technical foul called AFTER the made 3-point shot.

Anf if you think that we can go back and retroactively call a technical foul in this situation after the 3-point basket was made, I'll say the same thing to you I said to everybody else. Cite a rule...any rule...that will let you do that.

JAR, that has got absolutely nothing to do with what we're arguing.

This is a technical foul situation, and clearly has nothing to do with 6.4.1D.

A technical foul was called for an action during the throw-in. The ball became dead at that point. Not when the official realized it. Not when he blew the whistle. Why is this different?

All fouls are retroactively called. The foul occurs and it is not called by the official until a later time. You are trying to put a limit on the amount of time which can pass between the foul occurring and when it is called.

How about you post a citation which says how long an official has to call a foul after it occurs?

Yo, cobra.....

Please let all of us know what foul was called above other than the the technical foul called on the H coach AFTER the 3-point shot. I sureashell can't find one.

Nope, I'm done arguing with you. It's a waste of both our time. If you want to cite some rules that say my answers to the situation in post #6 was wrong, feel free to do so. If you can find a foul called other than the technical foul that was called after the made basket in post #6, feel free to point that out also. Then maybe we can continue.

Nope, it's a question of whether the throw-in was legal or not. Case book play 6.4.1D states it was a legal throw-in and can't be changed, even though the throw-in was made in error. And the ONLY technical foul called in post #6 was the one called on the H coach AFTER the made 3-point shot.

The coach didn't do anything after the shot. How is the foul after the shot?

You might want to go back and read post #6......

No one is talking about that anymore. This is the situation.

You discussed that play and were arguing that the ball becomes dead when a foul is called, not when it occurs. Posts 24, 28, 30, 32, and 40 by you all address this play.

Now you just are pretending that Cameron's play doesn't even exist, probably because you realized how wrong the things you were saying were.

Once again you just ignore the existence of Cameron's play, which everyone is currently talking about, including you in 5 separate posts.

No one cares what post #6 says. No one is talking about that. Please stop pointing out what post #6 says because it doesn't matter.

And I notice that you totally ignored my request to post a citation about the time limit for foul to be called.

Gee, maybe because that's when the ONLY foul that was called in in post #6 was actually called?

No one cares what post #6 says. No one is talking about that. Please stop pointing out what post #6 says because it doesn't matter.

And I notice that you completely ignore my post asking if I have summarized your way of handling the situation correctly...how about you answer that?

If the technical was called for what the coach said at that point, the shot should count. My understanding what that the technical was for the preceding act of apparent deception for his team to get the throw-in. I actually have a problem with this theory.

What the hell??? Post #6 is exactly what we are talking about...the statements were made that the 3 point shot would not count because the Unsporting T - for deliberately making the throw-in that was not theirs - would somehow magically make the live ball dead before the shooter touched the throw-in. Even after the ball was shot and the basket made, we could cancel it because the T actually took place before the shot, even though it wasn't called. Those are the statements being made and they are based on the situation in post #6.

The ball is not dead when the foul is "actually called." The ball is dead when
"A foul, other than player- or team-control occurs." 6-7-7

JAR, see post #6. There was NO technical foul called before the made shot for an apparent deception to get an unwarranted throw-in. If someone wants to call a "T" for that AFTER the made shot, fine. You do have rules backing to do so. What there is absolutely NO rules backing for though is for anyone to retoactively call an unsporting "T" and then go back and void either the throw-in or the made 3-pointer. You can't retroactively make a ball that was legally live dead, as Camron is trying to claim(I think).

Um yeah. And can you find anywhere in the situation described in post #6 where a foul of ANY kind occurred BEFORE the made 3-pointer?

That's exactly what happens in 10.1.8. I realize the difference in the two situations, but the foul is "actually called" after the fact in both. If the shot is waved off in one, why would it not be waved off in the other?

Reading is fundamental. Post #6 is the exact play that Camron is talking about.

1. B steps in for A's throw-in.
2. As soon as the throw-in is complete, coach is up saying it can't be corrected.
3. B1 makes a 3.
4. A coach goes ballistic.

Assuming the coach's comments come before the 3, there's an argument to be made that the ball becomes dead at that point; but are you really going to say you called a T on the coach for reminding you of the rule? You'd have to hit the whistle pretty quick to pull this off, IMO.

I've got no real problem with the T if your gut tells you coach planned the whole thing. But if it took me until after the 3 was made to figure it out, I'd have to question how "sure" I was.

New sitch:
A1 dribbling up the court. Just as he gets close to his three point line, A2 vents some frustration towards the official.

Right after his comments towards the official's lineage, A1 spots up for a three and makes it.

The official blows his whistle for the T while the shot is in flight.

Count the bucket?

Clearly not.

Because the RULING in 10.1.8 very specifically states "This procedure shall not be used in any other throw-in situation in which a mistake allows the wrong team to inbound the ball." It covers one very specific situation only.

The throw-in situation described in post #6 is one in which a wrong team was also allowed to inbound the ball. And the RULING of case book play 6.4.1SitD tells us how to deal with those---> "Once the throw-in ends - it is too late to change anything."

Just had to stir it up didn't you:D

Hopefully the official blows the whistle immediately. If the shot was clearly in flight (has left the shooter's hands) well before the whistle, then yes, I'm probably going to count the shot. Don't know of a rule that supports any other action....

True, but the procedure in this case includes putting "consumed" time back on the clock. No one is asking for that here.

Naw, instead some people are saying you can void a basket that was legally made with a live ball. As of right now, I'm still waiting for a rules citation that will allow us to do that. And if you're going to try to use a technical foul called after the basket was made, you'd better have some kind of rules citation attached to that flight of fancy too. That particular scenario isn't worth responding to otherwise, as I told cobra. And if you try to tell me that you can retroactively call a technical foul after a live ball went through the basket, well, good luck backing up any assertation like that with a rules citation also.

See SITUATION #1 of the 2002-03 Basketball Rules Interpretations linked below...

A1 calls a 60-second time-out in the backcourt. After the time-out ended, the official erroneously awards team B the ball for a sideline throw-in.
RULING: This is not a correctable error situation; play shall continue.

http://forum.officiating.com/basketb...s-archive.html

Rules rulz!

If A2 had committed a personal foul just prior to the shot, and the whistle didn't blow until the shot was in the air, you'd cancel that based on 6-7-7. The TF "occurred" when A2 spouted off, not when the whistle blew.
Camron's point is that the TF "occurs" when the team purposefully takes a throwin to which they're not entitled.

6-7-7. Ball is dead when A2 commits the foul. A1 shot a dead ball. The whistle only notifies everyone that a foul had occurred....it doesn't mark the exact time of the foul. Check out any of the many cases plays comparing the timing of a foul by A relative to the release of a shot. They are unanimously consistent in referring to when the infractions occur, not when the official blows the whistle.

Whether you want to call the T or not call the T in the case being discussed is OBVIOUSLY debatable and I've have to be absolutely sure before I did call a T. However, that is not the point being debated. The point being debates is that if a foul (T in this case) is called, the rules are quite clear that the ball is dead at the time of the act that draws the foul (6-7-7).

Any reference to 6.4.1 is a distraction. All it says is you can't kill the ball and give the ball back to the other team to correct the throwin mistake....nothing more. It is silent about what happens if another infraction occurs and is called. This case is a red herring in the purest sense.

Modified play:
Team B is incorrectly given the ball for the throw in. B1 passes the ball in to B3. B2 attempts to set a screen for B3 but does so illegally, committing a foul on A2. B3 releases the shot just after B2 fouls A2. Having not anticipated the call, the official then blows the whistle for B3's illegal screen. Does the shot count? Yes or No?

Snaq,

I understand Cam's point, but the case play he referenced applies only to action immediately after a made basket, not after an intervening TO. The difference is when the ball becomes live. In the case play, the ball never became live after the made basket because it was never at the disposal of a player from B for a throw-in. The T is actually for A preventing the ball from being promptly made live per 10-1-5-b.

By contrast, in the OP situation, the ball became live when handed to the player from A for the throw-in. It's an official's error and by rule can't be corrected after the throw-in ends.

Bottom line is the officials screwed the pooch if they let A have the ball instead of B following the TO. This is not a correctable error according to the 2002-2003 interp cited by JR. This is why the officials should always get together in these situations (TO after made basket) and confirm who gets the ball and where they get it.


In your new situation, timing is the issue. If the whistle for the T and the try occurred right on top of each other, then I can and would easily sell disallowing the try. But if there's a big delay between the try and the whistle, I can probably still sell it, but it's going to be a whole lot harder to do. That's why I said I hoped the whistle was immediate. There are times when a patient whistle is a good thing, but this isn't one of them.

You're right about the case play, i think Camron was simply using it as inspiration to deal with this. Looking at 6-7-7, though, he's right if you deem taking the throw-in to be a technical foul. The ball is dead from the point of action that is deemed a foul.

You're right, it's a tough sell after the ball goes in.

If I'm thinking that quickly, though, I'm whistling B1 for a tech for crossing the OOB plain during a throw-in and touching the ball.

Depends when the foul occurs - if it's before the release, then ball becomes dead per 6-7-7 & we disallow the try. If the ball is in flight when the foul occurs, then exception "a" applies.

Regarding whether to call a T in the situation being discussed, see my reply to Snaq above.

This is what I think would be almost impossible to justify - especially if the official makes the mistake by handing B1 the ball. Even at that, the officials can still correct it if they do so before the throw-in ends. But after the fact? How do we prove intent? It would be a very very difficult T to justify.

Or just use 10-1-5-b "preventing the ball from being promptly made live".

Administering official says "A ball", then B1 steps OOB & tries to take the ball for throw-in. I have no problem with an immediate T for this.......

I agree on both counts. I would counter that if A is slow coming out, B isn't delaying anything by pulling this, so it's hard to justify 10-1-5b. Also, we don't have to "prove" anything. We aren't a court of law, so there's no presumption of innocence. That said, it would have to be pretty obvious to me to make that call. If thinking fast enough, I'd likely go with a DoG warning (T if he touches the ball).

You really don't get it. You don't understand live ball/dead ball. Not knowing all the rules isn't a big deal, but you should try to learn them instead of just arguing incorrectly.

6-7-7 says that the ball becomes dead or remains dead when a foul occurs (there are exceptions to this regarding tries and taps but they are not important for this play.) Notice that the ball becomes dead when the foul occurs not when the official sounds his whistle.

The official knows that the team is stepping out of bounds with the intent to get the ball when they know it isn't theirs. Right then the foul occurs. What did we say happens when a foul occurs? The ball remains dead. So the player then receives the ball from one of the officials and everyone runs around like the ball is live even though it is actually dead. The ball is passed around, the ball ends up going through the basket. Even though the players were acting as if the ball was live it was actually dead the entire time so it is not a goal.

Just remember that all fouls are called retroactively. The foul occurs which causes the ball to become or remain dead. At some point after that the official will call the foul. If the ball goes though the basket before the official calls the foul it doesn't count as a score because the ball was actually dead.

You forgot to add that the officials and the players, after the ball was handed to the thrower for the throw-in, were all running around and acting as if the ball was live right up until the basket was made.

I get it.

You're saying that an official can hand the ball to a player for a throw-in. The player then makes a throw-in to a teammate while the official chops time in and the clock starts. That team can then pass the ball for any time period they want to before taking a shot. And after that shot was good, the official can THEN blow his whistle and call a technical foul on that team. And then cancel everything that happened before that, up to and including the throw-in, because the "T" occurred when the thrower was first was out of bounds before the throw-in started even though the technical foul wasn't actually called until umpty-ump seconds or minutes later.

A few questions.....
1) Why would the officials act as if the ball was live right from the start of the throw-in up until the made 3-pointer?
2) After the throw-in was completed and the administering official chopped time in and the clock started, how or do you correct the clock if.... say....the shooting team then took about 6 minutes to shoot?
3) Is there any time limit attached to how much time elapses between the occurence of the foul and blowing the whistle for that occurence?
4) Using that exact same logic, if that wrongly-given throw-in happened in the first quarter, could you still call the "T" in the fourth quarter and cancel everything that happened up to then?
5) Can you call that "T" right up until all officials have left the visual confines of the floor?
5) Did you even bother to read case book play 6.4.1SitD and that interp from 2002-03?
6) Are you an official?



I honestly don't really know what else to say.:)

Not that I am aware of. You tell us. Is there?


Does this case involve a technical foul call? (justified or not) No. So how does it possibly apply? 6-4-1 deals with the arrow, which is not a part of this play at all.

I expected something like that from Cobra but not really from you. Live and learn.

Hey JR, I think I finally get where they are coming from on this...

They're gonna have a "do over"!!

Oops - wrong team threw it in and then scored? That's OK. We'll just do it over!!:D

DJ, I have no idea anymore where they are coming from. And it's not worth citing the same rules, case plays and NFHS interps over and over again either when their very existence is being denied. Time to just let it go, I guess.:)

I'm sure it's somewhere along the lines of the time limit for calling a travel or double dribble.

It is no different from any other foul. The foul occurs and everyone continues to act as if the ball is live while the official is deciding if it was a foul or not. The only difference is this play took longer than normal for the foul to be called.

The rules don't say that there is a limit.

Cobra and jar - let's change the play ever so slightly. Instead of B2 hitting a 3-pointer, they go up and slam the ball home, with authority. If the ball is indeed dead, would you charge B2 with a second T for purposely dunking a dead ball?

No. He had no way of knowing the ball was dead.