out of bounds rule.

[upprdeck]

So I guess the reason for my confusion is that I took saving a ball and going out of bounds to be voluntary and the rulebook is stating it is not. in my mind I have the choice of going out of bounds to save a ball. in this case if the ball and player are in bounds and I have no reason to step out and do then it is a violation?

however it also sounds like if I go out of bounds just to go around defenders who are in my way that it is a violation?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by upprdeck

...
however it also sounds like if I go out of bounds just to go around defenders who are in my way that it is a violation?

Correct. Important word for you to remember here is momentum. Did player go OOB because of momentum?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

The thrower does not decide where his intial spot is.

The official designates the spot.

The spot is 3' wide.

As long as he keeps either foot on/over that spot, he may be able to move several 2-4 feet outside the spot with his second foot, in either direction.

Could a player, who has a long stride, have each foot outside the 3-foot spot on opposite sides (maybe 4-5 feet apart)...straddling the entire spot?

And would you call that a violation since neither foot was over the spot? (No, I'm not saying you should, but that is what the rule, taken literally, would lead to).

[BillyMac]

A player inbounding the ball may step on, but not over the line. During a designated spot throwin, the player inbounding the ball must keep one foot on or over the three-foot wide designated spot. An inbounding player is allowed to jump or move one or both feet. A player inbounding the ball may move backward as far as the five-second time limit or space allows. If player moves outside the three-foot wide designated spot it is a violation, not travelling. In gymnasiums with limited space outside the sidelines and endlines, a defensive player may be asked to step back no more than three feet.

If a player's momentum carries him or her off the court, he or she can be the first player to touch the ball after returning inbounds. That player must not have left the court voluntarily and must immediately return inbounds. That player must have something in and nothing out. It is not necessary to have both feet back inbounds. It is a violation for a player to intentionally leave the court for an unauthorized reason.

[socal]

It says in this thread that if a player goes out of bounds, he can establish him/her self inbounds if no part of them self is out of bounds, therefore it only takes one foot that is inbounds.

The exact situation is, player is inbounds, dives to save the ball, the ball is saved and is bouncing inbounds, he slides out of bounds, gets back up, a team mate now has possession, he gets one foot back inbounds and the other foot is up in the air (never touched anything, but last touched oob)

his team mate passes the ball to him while he is in this position. (one foot up, one foot down inbounds)

I am still getting two different perspectives from fellow referees, but I do recall going over a case book play where the player was dribbling and inadvertently goes oob then comes back in, and with one foot in and established, he maintained dribble and was inbounds.


thank you for your reply, please cite rule/case book

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by socal

I am still getting two different perspectives from fellow referees . . .

There are referees who don't know 4-35-1,2 and 7-1 and 9-3-1 NOTE and those who do.

Best to pay attention to those who do.

Do those references seal it for you?

[socal]

Originally Posted by Freddy

There are referees who don't know 4-35-1,2 and 7-1 and 9-3-1 NOTE and those who do.

Best to pay attention to those who do.

Do those references seal it for you?

Thank you, 4-35-1/2 tells me that one foot inbounds is ok if the other foot isnt touching o.o.b. So you do not need 2 feet to touch inbounds prior to touching the ball in order to establish as being inbounds, and legally touching the ball.

Strange that so many officials I have spoken to, some long term officials, not knowing this rule.


Thank you for your replies.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by socal

Thank you, 4-35-1/2 tells me that one foot inbounds is ok if the other foot isnt touching o.o.b. So you do not need 2 feet to touch inbounds prior to touching the ball in order to establish as being inbounds, and legally touching the ball.

Strange that so many officials I have spoken to, some long term officials, not knowing this rule.

Thank you for your replies.

The more you study the rules the more you'll be amazed at the amount of "strange" conversations you will have with "veteran" officials.

[grunewar]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

The more you study the rules the more you'll be amazed at the amount of "strange" conversations you will have with "veteran" officials.

Ouch! Agreed though.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by socal

Strange that so many officials I have spoken to, some long term officials, not knowing this rule.

It will be far from the last time. And you'll find many very accomplished officials that really are very poor with the rules. They get by on charisma and salesmanship. And they make it harder for those that actually do it right.

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

It will be far from the last time. And you'll find many very accomplished officials that really are very poor with the rules. They get by on charisma and salesmanship. And they make it harder for those that actually do it right.

Or, as has been heard around here as attributed to a relatively veteran official, "Everything I know I learned on the court." Vis-a-vis, others are merely "rules geeks" who aren't really in touch with the game.
Avid rules knowledge and "feel for the game" need not be mutually exclusive.
Best to possess both attributes.

[rockchalk jhawk]

Originally Posted by socal

It says in this thread that if a player goes out of bounds, he can establish him/her self inbounds if no part of them self is out of bounds, therefore it only takes one foot that is inbounds.

The exact situation is, player is inbounds, dives to save the ball, the ball is saved and is bouncing inbounds, he slides out of bounds, gets back up, a team mate now has possession, he gets one foot back inbounds and the other foot is up in the air (never touched anything, but last touched oob)

his team mate passes the ball to him while he is in this position. (one foot up, one foot down inbounds)

I am still getting two different perspectives from fellow referees, but I do recall going over a case book play where the player was dribbling and inadvertently goes oob then comes back in, and with one foot in and established, he maintained dribble and was inbounds.


thank you for your reply, please cite rule/case book

The bottom line is this in the most simple terms possible... If you're touching in bounds and nothing is touching OOB, then you're legal. If you're in the air (jumping from point A to B) then your status is tied to wherever you last were (you are where you were until you get to where you're going). If you jump from OOB towards the playing area then you are OOB until some part of you touches in bounds (as long as nothing is still touching OOB).

I don't have rule references in front of me.

Interesting theoretical situation... Player is running down the sideline dribbling the ball with one foot in, one out. The player only dribbles the ball when the in bounds foot is touching or has established her as in bounds, but in between dribbles (the ball is not touching the hand or any part of the player) the other foot strides in the OOB area. This is splitting hairs, but isn't it technically... legal?

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by rockchalk jhawk

Interesting theoretical situation... Player is running down the sideline dribbling the ball with one foot in, one out. The player only dribbles the ball when the in bounds foot is touching or has established her as in bounds, but in between dribbles (the ball is not touching the hand or any part of the player) the other foot strides in the OOB area. This is splitting hairs, but isn't it technically... legal?

No.

Cf. 9-3-1 NOTE: "The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary, even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she is out of bounds."

[rockchalk jhawk]

Originally Posted by Freddy

No.

Cf. 9-3-1 NOTE: "The dribbler has committed a violation if he/she steps on or outside a boundary, even though he/she is not touching the ball while he/she is out of bounds."

Gotcha, thanks.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by socal

It says in this thread that if a player goes out of bounds, he can establish him/her self inbounds if no part of them self is out of bounds, therefore it only takes one foot that is inbounds.

The exact situation is, player is inbounds, dives to save the ball, the ball is saved and is bouncing inbounds, he slides out of bounds, gets back up, a team mate now has possession, he gets one foot back inbounds and the other foot is up in the air (never touched anything, but last touched oob)

his team mate passes the ball to him while he is in this position. (one foot up, one foot down inbounds)

I am still getting two different perspectives from fellow referees, but I do recall going over a case book play where the player was dribbling and inadvertently goes oob then comes back in, and with one foot in and established, he maintained dribble and was inbounds.


thank you for your reply, please cite rule/case book

It was legal 2.5 years ago, it's legal now, and it will be legal 2.5 years from now (well, unless the rule changes).