Bump and Run

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Butterfly182310

Rather then waiting for one official to travel the entire length of the court.

Waiting? You haven't seen me run. I'm a gazelle, I tell you. A gazelle. My partner blinks, and I'm already there.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As I previously posted, unless the mechanic has changed over the years, and that is certainly possible, since our local board has switched from NFHS, to IAABO mechanics, over the past few years, the "by the book" mechanic used to be to always administer your own line, that is to say, your new own line.

Of course, IAABO has mucked up the definition of "your own line", which is a separate problem for a separate thread.

Billy, do you have the blue IAABO book? I'm looking at page 50 of the two-person mechanics manual, and it doesn't distinguish between FC and BC when it tells you to bump-n-run.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Butterfly182310

I don't recall a coast to coast switch on a violation ever having been proper mechanics.

Federation 2 person... It doesn't matter if it's front court or back court. It doesn't matter which sideline the throw-in is coming from. Old trail becomes new lead. Old lead becomes new trail. Forcing old lead to become new lead just delays the resumption of play while he gets into position. Seems to make more sense for both officials to reposition simultaneously by going half the length of the court rather then waiting for one official to travel the entire length of the court.

The only time I can see going from lead to lead is if play has drawn both officials to be nearly opposite each other. Then the trail official might give his/her partner a nod, sending them to the opposite endline, rather than coming across the court. Still wouldn't be "proper" mechanic though.

Now, if you're working with someone who doesn't move real well, and you want to help him out, go ahead and run the length. You'll have a greatfull partner. Just realize that if you get into that habit, you could look like a Chinese Fire Drill when you work with someone else.

Not correct. Line coverage is determined before the violation, not after.

If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old lead's sideline, the old lead takes it.
If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old lead's sideline, the old trail takes it.
If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.
If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.

In all cases, the "other" official boxes in....perhaps causing a coast-to-coast.

Bump and run ONLY occurs when the new throwin spot is in the new backcourt on the old trail's sideline.

The case where it causes a coast-to-coast for the old-lead -> new lead is rare.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old lead's sideline, the old trail takes it.
If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.
If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.

In all cases, the "other" official boxes in....perhaps causing a coast-to-coast.

Bump and run ONLY occurs when the new throwin spot is in the new backcourt on the old trail's sideline.

The case where it causes a coast-to-coast for the old-lead -> new lead is rare.

There isn't a single instance where I'm going to stay with the ball and watch my partner run past me to the other end of the floor. However, I'm simply not sure whether we're even talking about the same thing anymore. Yes, there are inbounds situations where there will not be a true bump and run, but the old lead should never have to run past his partner and be the new lead -- this doesn't happen.

Six states for me now and we've all handled this situation exactly the same. None, thank goodness, were IAABO states.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by RichMSN

Six states for me now and we've all handled this situation exactly the same. None, thank goodness, were IAABO states.

I've only done two states, 50% of which are IAABO, and looking at the IAABO mechanics, Billy's got this one wrong.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Not correct. Line coverage is determined before the violation, not after.

If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old lead's sideline, the old lead takes it.
If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old lead's sideline, the old trail takes it.If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.
If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.

I've have always been taught to bump and run on all of these, but the one in red just doesn't make sense.

You've got one guy, essentially running straight across the court for the throwin while the other guy runs a crossing route to the other end when the throw-in was on his sideline. The Old/New Lead could use the Old/New Trail as a pick if he wanted to on this

The only time I don't B&R is when the violation occurs right in front of the Old Trail in a situation where the Old Lead hasn't gone too far down the court. This is typically in a press or short-lived transition situation. Even then, it's understood that it's not proper mechanic.

If you don't bump-and-run, you're essentially creating a switch on a non-foul situation.

[sseltser]

I have always thought that this is the correct process:

1. Is it a shooting foul?
If yes, calling official becomes trail.
If no, go to 2.

2. Is it a non-shooting foul?
If yes, officials switch "vertically".
If no, go to 3.

3. Is the spot in the "new" backcourt?
If yes, old lead (or new trail, if not involving change in possession) becomes new trail and administers throw-in.
If no, go to 4.

4. If 1-3 do not apply (that is, no foul involved and throw-in in the "new" frountcourt), the official who has responsiblity for that line administers the throw-in.
If this requires a "switch" from trail to lead, so be it. Sideline throw-ins below the free throw line extended may be administered by lead or trail.



Any of these incorrect? Any situations missed?

[Camron Rust]

Let me clean up my statements...they were a bit incomplete...

If you're going by the book...


NON-TURNOVER (new/old trail takes all BC throw-ins and trail's FC sideline, remains trail)

• If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old lead's sideline, the old lead takes it.
• If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old lead's sideline, the old trail takes it.
• If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.
• If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it.

TURNOVER (old-lead/new-trail takes all throw-ins in the new backcourt and all throw-ins on their sideline)

• If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old lead's sideline, the old lead takes it.
• If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old lead's sideline, the old lead takes it.
• If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old trail's sideline, the old lead takes it. (bump/run)
• If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it. (lead goes coast to coast....switch just like a violation in the new frontcourt on the lead's sideline above the FT line)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

There are exceptions. Trail has backcourt call, which obviously occurs in the backcourt, on his side of the basket line. That's his line, and the violation is near his line, so he will administer the throwin and become the new trail. The old lead will run the length of the court and become the new lead.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Unless the mechanic of administering on your own line has changed over the years, I'm talking about a "by the book" mechanic. Over the years I have found this mechanic to be easily confused by both rookies, and veterans, thus I think Butterfly182310's comment is the most important in the thread: You should be looking for the old lead official coming toward you, toss the ball in his/her direction, and immediately head for the endline to become the new lead official. As long as you make eye contact with your partner, and make the mechanic look smooth, nobody will notice whether you do it by the book, or not. We don't want both to run down to the endline to become the new lead, with nobody to administer, and we don't want both hanging around as the new trail fighting over one basketball.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As I previously posted, unless the mechanic has changed over the years, and that is certainly possible, since our local board has switched from NFHS, to IAABO mechanics, over the past few years, the "by the book" mechanic used to be to always administer your own line, that is to say, your new own line. Of course, IAABO has mucked up the definition of "your own line", which is a separate problem for a separate thread.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it. (lead goes coast to coast....switch just like a violation in the new frontcourt on the lead's sideline above the FT line)

I think that you're agreeing with me. NFHS, IAABO, or other?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

TURNOVER (old-lead/new-trail takes all throw-ins in the new backcourt and all throw-ins on their sideline)

• If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old lead's sideline, the old lead takes it.
• If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old lead's sideline, the old lead takes it.
• If the violation occurs in the old FC on the old trail's sideline, the old lead takes it. (bump/run)
• If the violation occurs in the old BC on the old trail's sideline, the old trail takes it. (lead goes coast to coast....switch just like a violation in the new frontcourt on the lead's sideline above the FT line)

Since the bump and run is only in effect for turnovers, I cut out the rest. For some reason, though, this list makes more sense to me than the last one. I still hadn't heard of the coast-to-coast exception for old BC violations. We do bump and run on that here, and the way I read the IAABO manual, we're doing it correctly.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

I think that you're agreeing with me. NFHS, IAABO, or other?

Okay, Billy, I have to ask. Have you looked at the current IAABO manual? The example on page 50 is for an old FC violation, but there's no exception given for a violation in the old BC. The exception on page 51, however, seems to be for a quick transition play. But this seems to be, effectively, a defensive violation (not a turnover). This is really an extension of the principal of creating a switch when there is a defensive violation in the FC creating a throw-in along the old lead's sideline above the FT line extended.

BTW, is there a place other than these illustrations that lays out the principals for this?

[Camron Rust]

NFHS only prescribes the bump and run when the throwin will be in the new backcourt. Otherwise, you administer throw-ins on your line.

No, Snaqs, it is not only in effect on turn overs, it is a bump and run anytime there is a throwin that goes to the backcourt sideline opposite the trail...perhaps in a pressing situation where the ball is knocked OOB by the defense on the lead's line.

Here is the NFHS mechanic from the book

NFHS Manual #128

c. Backcourt. The new trail official shall adminster all throw-ins in the backcourt and may need to change sides of the court ("bump and run") depending on the throw-in spot. If a quick violation or out-of-bounds situation occurs in a team's backcourt and reverses the direction of play so that the throw-in team is in its frontcourt, the ball will be in-bounded by the official responsible for that boundary line as in a frontcourt throw-in above (b).

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

NFHS only prescribes the bump and run when the throwin will be in the new backcourt. Otherwise, you administer throw-ins on your line.

No, Snaqs, it is not only in effect on turn overs, it is a bump and run anytime there is a throwin that goes to the backcourt sideline opposite the trail...perhaps in a pressing situation where the ball is knocked OOB by the defense on the lead's line.

Here is the NFHS mechanic from the book

NFHS Manual #128

c. Backcourt. The new trail official shall adminster all throw-ins in the backcourt and may need to change sides of the court ("bump and run") depending on the throw-in spot. If a quick violation or out-of-bounds situation occurs in a team's backcourt and reverses the direction of play so that the throw-in team is in its frontcourt, the ball will be in-bounded by the official responsible for that boundary line as in a frontcourt throw-in above (b).

I guess I didn't consider it a bump and run if it's on my (trail) line and I'm not changing sides of the court. I've made the call, and I'm administering the throwin. I can see how it might look like it, though.

[BillyMac]

"During fast break situation, ball out of bounds on Lead's sideline. Lead administers throwin as new Trail. Trail becomes new Lead."

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

"During fast break situation, ball out of bounds on Lead's sideline. Lead administers throwin as new Trail. Trail becomes new Lead."

Not in our world. We'd still bump and run this.

[Mregor]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

As I previously posted, unless the mechanic has changed over the years, and that is certainly possible, since our local board has switched from NFHS, to IAABO mechanics, over the past few years, the "by the book" mechanic used to be to always administer your own line, that is to say, your new own line.

Of course, IAABO has mucked up the definition of "your own line", which is a separate problem for a separate thread.

They call it, my line, my call, my ball here. First time a partner pulled that one on me here, I thought they were screwin' with the new guy. To me it's bump and run but when in Rome...