I could swear that I read in NFHS rule book something about it being illegal (a violation?) to shoot over the top of the backboard, but I could not find it when I looked last night. Did I just imagine this, or is there really such a prohibition? :confused: Please help.

See 7-2-Note: "When a rectangular backboard is used, the ball is out of bounds if it passes over the backboard."

Chuck

Many Thanks, Chuck
 

Chuck, thanks for the citation.

Of course, if a fan-shaped backboard is being used, this prohibition does not apply.

Don't know how things are in your neck of the woods, but our local middle school only replaced their fan-shaped white metal backboards a couple of years ago with the plexiglass! Not likely to see these in HS, but depending on what level you ref, you may see these fan-shaped boards still.

Fans
 

Thank you all for the info about the fan shaped backboards. Our games this year are all in HS gyms with plexiglass, but I have seen them in other gyms.

One additional comment
 

CYO

If the ball contacts any of the hardware (support structure) it is a violation and awarded to the opponent.

Just to verify....

This rule is applied if it passes over the backboard in EITHER direction??

Thanks,

RR

RnR, Since the note I posted above does not specify one specific direction, you are correct in saying that it applies to a ball passing over the backboard in any direction.

Chuck

It IS NOT illegal for a ball to pass over a rectangular backboard. What is illegal is for the ball to go BEHIND the backboard.

Over the backboard
 

heyref,
Chuck's reference is an exact quote from the NFHS rule book. Is your comment that it is not a violation, just out of bounds, or that it is still in play? Also, it clearly can be behind the backboard and still be in play and in bounds.

Re: Fans
 

I haven't seen any in quite a while, however I see a lot of backboard shaped fans!

Re: Over the backboard
 

The ball is not dead and still in play. The ball must pass behind the backboard before it becomes dead.

This couldn't be further from the truth.

The ball may indeed go behind the board without violation. It is only a violation for it be be behind the board if it got there by going over the top (which is the actual violation). If it is there from any other direction, there is no violation (as long as it doesn't touch the supports or back of the board).

Likewise, passing over the top from back to front, albeit very rare, is a violation.

What's the citation for that? The Rule 7-2-Note says "When a rectangular backboard is used, the ball is out of bounds if it passes over the backboard." Is there something else involved in the HS rules that I missed?

RnR, the only place your statement is true is in the NBA. If that's what you intended, then fine. But if you are talking about a high school or college game, I'm afraid you are simply wrong. My citation above is directly from the NFHS rulebook. I don't think it can get any clearer than that.

In fact, now that I think about it, the first sentence of your post is false, even in the NBA.

Chuck

When I said "pass behind" I meant "pass behind from above".
You have to remember the people who write these rules do not take much time to think out what they really meant to say. This rule is exactly one of those times. If you look up the meaning of the word "over" here is what you will find:
1.In or at a position above or higher than: a sign over the door; a hawk gliding over the hills.
2.Above and across from one end or side to the other: a jump over the fence.
They have chosen to use the second definition as their meaning rather that the first. After they state this, then they try to explain what they really mean in several cases. Here are some quotes directly out of the NFHS rules and casebooks.

"Ques. (1) - The ball touches or rolls along the top edge of the backboard without touching the supports. Is the ball dead? ANS. - No. "

"The ball strikes the side edge or top edge of the backboard from a pass or try from the front or back of the plane of the backboard.
Ruling: The ball remains live if it touches a side edge or top edge if it rebounds and comes down in front of the backboard."

Finally, What do you have if a player is standing at the corner of the court at the base line and passes the ball to a teammate on the other side of the court also in the corner at the baseline and the ball passes over the top of the backboard during the pass. YOU HAVE NOTHING.
In every one of these cases that the "RULES PEOPLE" have said is LEGAL, the ball has at one time or another "PASSED OVER THE TOP OF THE BACKBAORD".

So, once again, THE BALL IS NOT DEAD WHEN IT PASSES OVER THE TOP OF A BACKBOARD, ONLY WHEN IT PASSES BEHIND THE BACKBOARD (either coming from the front to the back or vise-versa).

If you disagree with the "RULES PEOPLE", let them know about it.

Oh good grief...if the ball passes from the front side of the backboard OVER the top to the backside of the backboard, it is a violation...if the ball passes OVER from the back side to the front side, it is a violation...it really is not very difficult to grasp this concept...

Except that is not what the rule says. Why don't YOU re-write the rule and then we will all understand it perfectly.

I don't even know what to say about this. If you really think that the ball passed over the backboard in those situations, then you are not in touch with actual English usage. Using your thinking, if I stand on one side of a 1 foot high fence and jump 18" straight up, then land in the same spot from which I started, I have jumped over the fence. That's ridiculous. Nobody means that when they say "jump over the fence".

And using the second definition that you posted, that's exactly what the rule says.

Respctfully, I don't and I won't. I think you're trying to be a little too clever for your own good, to be honest.

Chuck

I try to keep it simple.....Front to back, back to front...violation.....if you were in proper position in either two or three man mechanics....in my opinion it would be really hard to determine if the ball went over the backboard from side to side.....and in most cases if it truly went over the backboard side to side...it would more than likely hit a support or bracket...at least where i officiate.

AK ref SE

Well, I'm gald I posted the definitions for you. Just curious why you chose the second definition instead of the first. Obviousley you feel no other ref would be stupid enough to think of it in terms of the first definition and wonder why the rules people have chosen not to clarify it for the rest of us "ridiculous" people as you have.

So those Alaska refs make up stuff as they go uh. Interesting.

heyref-
What did I make up?

Just made a statement that if it truly went over the backboard side to side that it would hit some sort of support or bracket.......

Guess I am using the same definition as chuck!

AK ref SE

And if it did not?

Then it more than likely did not go straight over the top of the backboard.....and it was a pass in front of the backboard.

AK ref SE

I knew you would evade the question by making up a new senario.

I gave you an example (above) to show why I "chose" the second definition instead of the first. The fact of the matter is that no one uses the first definition in a context that we are discussing. Literally no one I know would say in my above example that I had jumped over the fence, even tho according to the first definition you posted, I did jump over it. No one uses "over" in that way in that context. No one. So that leaves the second definition.

If, as you suggest, we use the first defitinition, the ball would be OOB on every high-arcing jump shot, since the ball is thrown higher than the top of the backboard. Since the ball is obviously NOT considered OOB in those situations, definition 1 cannot be the correct interpretation.

And although I would not use the term "stupid", I do think that no reasonable official would use the first definition in determining whether the ball had passed over the backboard.

I don't think I can say anything on the subject more clearly than that.

Chuck

Look Slider, he didn't make up a new scenario. He stated a FACT. In many of the gyms he works, the basket supports are directly above the backboard. So if the ball passed directly over the backboard from side to side, it would of necessity hit a support. Therefore, as a logical necessity, if it didn't hit a support, it didn't pass directly over the backboard.

Not evading the question.....just going by your definition of over......if it were to truly go over the backboard from side to side......The ball would have to go directly over the middle of the backboard......and if I were the Lead official....I should not be looking up there anyway...and if I were the trail or the Center I would not be in an angle to determine if it went straight over the top of the backboard.....I am not evading the question...just giving you my opinion on the chances of it happening and being able to make the call. So what if! Game goes on is that what you want to hear.
And yes in Alaska we play by different rules...because some people think we are part of Canada....and other people think we live in Igloos!

AK ref SE

Obviously, Chuckie you don't get it. I never said anything about the way a basket was supported. Half the gyms in this country are supported from behind with cable running from the back of the board to the wall. But you probably never have seen one of these boards in your limited career. You can't or won't answer my question and you have no way to explain your way out of this expect to make up "what ifs" to help you out.

A basketball can roll, touch, or pass DIRECTLY OVER the top of a backboard with out touching any supports and NOT BE DEAD. PERIOD. You can come back with what ever excuse you want but you CANNOT tell me those things are illegal. I've said enough on this subject.

Look Slider, he didn't make up a new scenario.[/B][/QUOTE]Look Slider?

Slider is back?

That explains everything!

The only thing I don't get is your logic. If you use definition 1 to say that the ball has passed over the backboard, then you have to say that in my example, I jumped over the fence. Would you say that jumping 18 inches while next to a 1 foot high fence is "jumping over the fence"? Just answer that for me, and I'll be satisfied.

If you say no, I haven't jumped over the fence, then you have to say that the ball hasn't passed over the backboard when passed from one corner on the baseline to the opposite corner on the baseline (one of your own examples from earlier in the thread), even if it is thrown above the height of the backboard.

If you say yes, I really have jumped over the fence, then again I say you are not using the English language in a reasonable way. No one uses the word "over" in that way in such a context.

This is the only thing you've written that is correct in this whole thread. I will agree with you. If the ball rolls entirely along the top edge of the backboard without hitting any other equipment, then it remains in play.

If, and this is a huge if (b/c the examples you have given are not of this type), you are talking about a ball traveling the exact same path as the ball rolling along the top edge of the backboard, except that it is 2 inches above the top edge of the backboard, then I would say that you are probably correct. Even then, it's possible that we should rule the ball as being OOB. But the chance of that actually happening in a game (or the chance of a human correctly judging that it actually happened in a game) is infinitesimal, and probably not worth serious consideration.

Chuck

It's the only explanation for this thread!

I can see from your posts here that you are generally an
open minded, easy going type of guy who takes great pains to
see the other person's point of view and enjoys exploring
new ideas. But, at the risk of pushing you a little too far
& upsetting you, I must ask this question:

What the f*ck are you talking about?

Please take this question in the spirit it is intended.

It IS NOT illegal for a ball to pass over a rectangular backboard. What is illegal is for the ball to go BEHIND the backboard. [/B][/QUOTE]Let me point you to the language in casebook play 7.6.1SITUATION. The exact wording is "this play is somewhat different than those most frequently used to bring out the point that THE BALL BECOMES DEAD WHEN IT PASSES OVER A RECTANGULAR BOARD".

Hope that ends this silliness.

I see you are from Anchorage,Alaska!

Ergo,you make up stuff as you go?

VERY interesting! LOL!

Had this happen
 

Player 'A' was inbounding under his basket. Player 'B' was defending the throw-in. Player 'B' deflected the throw-in and cause it to go behind the backboard and through the horizontal supports behind the backboard that anchored it to the wall.

The ball did not touch the supports, merely went through them and into play. Is this a violation?

Re: Had this happen
 

No violation,as long the ball didn't go over a rectangular backboard after B deflected it. Again,see casebook play 7.6.1SIT.

I think WE all understand this rule just fine...the only one who seems to be having a hard time grasping the rule would be you...

where's mick with those brownpops???

I only had to read this much of your message before I started laughing, b/c I knew exactly where it was going!! I was not drinking adult beverages (that would be Diet Coke) at the time, however. :D

Chuck

Heyref-
I guess you are the only one on the board that has a grasp on the English language, basketball, and your perception and views are the only one that matters.

I will agree with one thing you said. Yes a ball can roll, bounce, touch the top part of the backboard and still be in play.

Hey Rockyroad...I will take one of those Brownpops now......but I better head south so it does not freeze!

AK ref SE

why they made the rule
 

Just in case you're interested.
Wilt Chamberlain played at Kansas U 1957.
They had an inbounds play from under their hoop.
The thrower-in threw the ball OVER the backboard
to the alley-ooping Wilt.
He couldn't be stopped, so they made it illegal.
BTW stop arguing and learn the rules.

Re: why they made the rule
 

U da man! I couldn't agree more.