Violation?

[Rita C]

This also happened in a game tonight and provoked discussion later. So I am presenting it for discussion here.


There is a mass of humanity under the basket, rebounding. Blue gets the ball on the other side of the key. Black player is off the court under the basket (I do not know if it was intentional or not because of the scrum). He moves in a straight line from one side of the key to the other directly toward the blue player who rebounded the ball and reenters the court to try to defend the player who has the ball. Has he violated?

Rita

[just another ref]

No infraction here. Play on.

[BktBallRef]

Not IMO. Sounds like he left the floor unintentionally and returned to play defense. No call from me.

[APG]

Play on

[Adam]

Assuming he was OOB legally, he's either committed a Technical foul, or nothing. Most likely, I've got nothing. The rule doesn't say they have to take the most direct path back to the court. It just says he can't purposefully or deceitfully delay his return. Sounds like neither of those to me.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Assuming he was OOB legally, he's either committed a Technical foul, or nothing. Most likely, I've got nothing. The rule doesn't say they have to take the most direct path back to the court. It just says he can't purposefully or deceitfully delay his return. Sounds like neither of those to me.

If he intentionally left, to gain advantage to get around the scrum, it would be a violation, not a technical foul.

Rita

[APG]

Originally Posted by Rita C

If he intentionally left, to gain advantage to get around the scrum, it would be a violation, not a technical foul.

Rita

I think this is two different cases. If he left the floor to again an advantage, then the violation is for leaving the court for an unauthorized reason. The player was never out of bounds legally and thus the violation.

Now if the player was out of bounds legally (throw-in, momentum, etc) but purposely and deceitfully delays coming back in, then you'd have a technical.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rita C

If he intentionally left, to gain advantage to get around the scrum, it would be a violation, not a technical foul.

Rita

Correct, but I was under the assumption that he was out legally; since you didn't see him leave, you have to assume that much.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Correct, but I was under the assumption that he was out legally; since you didn't see him leave, you have to assume that much.

Got it. I reread the casebook last night and saw that.

Rita

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Rita C

If he intentionally left, to gain advantage to get around the scrum, it would be a violation, not a technical foul.

That's not what Snaq said. He said if he was OOB LEGALLY, then it's either nothing or a technical foul.

It's nothing if he returns immediately. The rule doesn't require him to take the shortest path.

If he doesn't return immediately and attempts to gain an advantage by delaying, then it's a technical foul.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

That's not what Snaq said. He said if he was OOB LEGALLY, then it's either nothing or a technical foul.

It's nothing if he returns immediately. THe rule does require him to take the shortest path.

If he doesn't return immediately and attempts to gain an advantage by delaying, then it's a technical foul.

Typo? Or am I missing something?

[BktBallRef]

Typo. Got a real bad habit lately of leaving the n't off my contractions.

[Rita C]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

That's not what Snaq said. He said if he was OOB LEGALLY, then it's either nothing or a technical foul.

It's nothing if he returns immediately. The rule doesn't require him to take the shortest path.
.

Staying out of bounds was advantageous for him because he didn't have to go through other players. Is that with the spirit of the rules?

Rita

[Adam]

Was he returning immediately to the court? Did he take a direct path, from the point you saw him, to the player with the ball?