.3 Seconds on the Clock

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

7-6-1 "The throw-in pass shall touch another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched."

If the pass (otherwise legal) touches a player, it's a legal throw-in. The touching may be (and is, in the case being discussed) a violation.

Yes, I see. Thanks.

So in this case, should the clock run at all?

[rpirtle]

No. Violation occurred the same moment the ball was touched by Player B who was OOB.

[Hawks Coach]

Trail chops clock, lead sees violation and blows whistle. Between two signals, time expires. Does lag time apply, or does .3 go back on clock?

[rpirtle]

Trail shouldn't chop clock until the ball is touched by a player on the court. If my partner chopped early, I'd have the clock reset to .3 seconds.

[Hawks Coach]

I am saying that trail chops as ball is touched and timer reacts to that chop. Whistle happens immediately after, timer reacts after horn has sounded. Does lag time come into play, or do you say clock never should have started (NFHS-college and pro it is clear that the clock is reset).

[rpirtle]

I agree with you. Clock never should have started...no lag time. Reset clock to .3 secs.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
I am saying that trail chops as ball is touched and timer reacts to that chop. Whistle happens immediately after, timer reacts after horn has sounded. Does lag time come into play, or do you say clock never should have started (NFHS-college and pro it is clear that the clock is reset).

Rule reference coach?

I don't think the NFHS rule is as clear as the NCAA rule.

NCAA 5-11-4
When play is resumed by a throw-in, the game clock and shot clock shall be started when the ball is legally touched by or touches a player on the playing court.

NFHS 5-9-4
If play is resumed by a throw-in, the clock shall be started when the ball touches, or is touched by, a player on [/b]the court after it is released by the thrower.

The NFHS rule does not have the requirement that the ball be legally touched. Is it implied? You would think so but the rule doesn't state that.

Also, what's the difference in the playing court vs the court? Rule 1 describes the playing court as being the inbounds area. It would seem that the court includes inbounds and OOB areas.

Common sense would dictate that no time runs off the clock, but I'm not sure the rules support it. The trail starts the clock when the ball is touched on the court. He has no way of knowing, in many cases, whether the player is OOB or not.

[Hawks Coach]

I was referring to the difference between having a lag time rule in NFHS and not having one in college and pro. In college and pro, since you know that the violation happended at the precise moment as the touch, you can reset the clock. But because of the lag time rule, it seems that time could expire in NFHS, even though we know it should not have happened. I am for putting the time back on in all cases, but I do not know that strict interpretation of lag time allows it in NFHS.

So I am saying the same thing - that despite common sense, it seems that the trail's signal could start the clock, late reaction to the lead's whistle would allow .3 seconds to go by, and lag time could create a situation where the horn goes off and the game is legally over.

[Edited by Hawks Coach on Nov 29th, 2002 at 10:37 PM]

[BktBallRef]

Thanks for the clarification, Coach. I misunderstood your point.

[jbduke]

Coach,

In this situation, my understanding is that the lag time provision does not apply, as time was never properly chopped in. Time is only to be chopped when a ball is legally touched. Since that condition is not met, it seems to me that we may reset the clock here with impunity.

If we are in violent agreement, I apologize.

jb

[Nevadaref]

Lady and Gents,
I believe that your whole discussion about lag time on this play is moot since the violation occurs BEFORE the ball is touched.
NFHS 9-2-12 . . . No teammate of the thrower shall be out of bounds after a designated-spot throw-in begins.

Therefore, it is clear that if the player is called for stepping on the sideline as he jumps to catch the pass, the violation occurs at this point and no time should run off the clock. If any does, simply put it back on.

Rainmaker, this rule is the reason that I wrote, in an earlier post, WillieBfree and his partner should have given the ball to the other team for a division line throw-in and not an endline throw-in. If you re-read his original post, he makes it clear that this was a designated-spot throw-in when he tells us that the team lost the ball out of bounds on the endline.
Also, 9-2-12 should make it clear that it is the teammate of the thrower, not the thrower himself, who has violated in this case. Hence, the throw-in is at the spot of the violation near the division line.

I'll end with a comment that if this throw-in had been after a goal or an awarded goal, we probably have to go by 9-2-10 since it is no longer a designated-spot throw-in. Then we can get into the lag time dicussion.


[Edited by nevadaref on Nov 30th, 2002 at 01:21 AM]

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by jbduke
Coach,

In this situation, my understanding is that the lag time provision does not apply, as time was never properly chopped in. Time is only to be chopped when a ball is legally touched. Since that condition is not met, it seems to me that we may reset the clock here with impunity.

If we are in violent agreement, I apologize.

jb

Whether the time was properly chopped in,or not,is not the problem.The timer can legally start the clock if an official doesn't give the time-in signal at the proper time.NFHS rule 5-9-1==="If the official neglects to signal,the timer is authorized to start the clock as per rule,unless an official specifically signals continued time out".The problem in this case occurs when the timer wrongly starts the clock.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
Lady and Gents,
I believe that your whole discussion about lag time on this play is moot since the violation occurs BEFORE the ball is touched.
NFHS 9-2-12 . . . No teammate of the thrower shall be out of bounds after a designated-spot throw-in begins.

Therefore, it is clear that if the player is called for stepping on the sideline as he jumps to catch the pass, the violation occurs at this point and no time should run off the clock. If any does, simply put it back on.
Also, 9-2-12 should make it clear that it is the teammate of the thrower, not the thrower himself, who has violated in this case. Hence, the throw-in is at the spot of the violation near the division line.

So,Nevada,if A1 is making a throw in at his own endline,and A2,while running downcourt,inadvertantly steps on a sideline at center court,you are going to immediately blow your whistle and give the ball to B at center court for A's violation of rule9-2-12--even if the ball is still in A1's hands? I'd like to be there to see that one!

[Nevadaref]

B][/QUOTE]So,Nevada,if A1 is making a throw in at his own endline,and A2,while running downcourt,inadvertantly steps on a sideline at center court,you are going to immediately blow your whistle and give the ball to B at center court for A's violation of rule9-2-12--even if the ball is still in A1's hands? I'd like to be there to see that one! [/B][/QUOTE]

JR, I understand that this may be pushing the envelope, but according to the rule AS WRITTEN this is a violation, and the penalty is just as you have described.
Now, in a game I didn't see the player step OOB. Sorry, coach must have missed it. But for a rules exam....
I believe this is a case where my youth is a problem. I do not know the history of this rule. I don't have the handbooks going back to 1962, or the comments that accompanied this rule's inclusion to the rules book.
Perhaps you could shed some light here!
Personally, I would like to know if the intent of 9-2-12 was only to distinguish a designated-spot throw-in from one where the team may run the entire endline. More specifically, was the restriction on being OOB meant to apply to the whole court or just the endline. And how about a teammate stepping OOB at the division line during a throw-in that is after a goal? Is this a violation or not?
In short, I may be missing the spirit of this rule because I probably wasn't born when it was written!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by Nevadaref
[/B]

Personally, I would like to know if the intent of 9-2-12 was only to distinguish a designated-spot throw-in from one where the team may run the entire endline. More specifically, was the restriction on being OOB meant to apply to the whole court or just the endline. And how about a teammate stepping OOB at the division line during a throw-in that is after a goal? Is this a violation or not?
In short, I may be missing the spirit of this rule because I probably wasn't born when it was written! [/B][/QUOTE]1)Yup,R9-2-12 is used for spot throw ins only anywhere on the floor,endline or sideline.The violation is intended to be for a team mate to be deliberately OOB after the designated thrower in is given the ball.The key word is "deliberately".If you have any doubts,don't call anything.This is usually called on a spot throw-in when the thrower in A1 passes the ball to A2(who is also OOB),and A2 then passes the ball in bounds to another teammate.Violation. Also,don't confuse this with R10-3-4,which is a T for a player using the OOB's to gain an advantage.Completely different plays.
2)A teammate of the thrower in inadvertantly stepping OOB is never a violation.The only violation that you can get on this play is if that player touches the throw in before he legally returns in bounds.If he does,then that player caused the ball to go OOB.

Btw,what makes you think that I was born when these rules were first written?