Gentlemen, please notice, however, that nowhere does the rule say that the player is allowed to touch the ball after it has been released on a throw-in pass. The defender is allowed to break the boundary plane, perhaps due to his momentum carrying him toward the inbounder. But nowhere is the prohibition on touching the ball while it is still on the OOB side of the boundary plane lifted.

Chuck

Chuck -

thanks for your point; does it specifically say (for HS now) in the rule book anywhere that the defender, at no time, can touch the ball while it is on the OOB side of the plane?
e.g - say there is 15' of room behind the endline and the thrower-in backs up and throws a baseball pass...the defender can not intercept that pass if he catches it on the OOB side?

Hawks Coach

You are as sharp as a tack... this is tough, (I do not have rulebooks handy)
This is what I have.... NO BASKET, Team A has a spot throw-in at the location the ball hit B1.

OK, seasoned veterans... rip my answer to shreds.

My response to Hawks coaches question would be......First of all B1 had not established inbounds status so a ball deflecting of his head to in bounds would be an out of bounds violation! I would probably blow the whistle.....Give the ball back to A and give him/her the end line.......If Coach B gets upset let him know that you could have called a T for his player touching the ball on the OOB side of the line! Just a guess! But that is what I would do...until someone on the board corrects me!

AK ref SE

I agree with your ruling. But, I don't think that was the intent of the question with respect to the explanation.

It would probably be coach A complaining that their was no T. In that case, I would tell coach A that the intent of the rule that warrants a T is to prevent B from trying to intercept/block that pass. B has the right to get back inbounds from the previous play and is even required to get directly inbounds or be at risk for a T. For that matter, you would have to call the violation (warning) on B for even being across te line during the throwin.

As you concluded, a simple violation on B for toucing the ball while OOB.

What about the loss of running the baseline for A based on B being out of bounds and contacting the ball? If I am A's coach, that might concern me more.

Well, I'm not completely sure, but here's what I do know. Rule 10-3-12 says a player shall not "reach through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touch ro dislodge the ball as in 9-2 Penalty 3". Notice that there is no mention that this prohibition ends upon the release of the throw-in.

9-2 Penalty 3 says "If an opponent(s) of the thrower reaches through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touches or dislodges the ball, a technical foul shall be charged to the offender. No warning for delay required. See 10-3-12 Penalty."

Again, the penalty is a T, and there is no mention that you can touch the ball after the ball leaves the inbounder's hands.

So I guess you have to make up your own mind. But to me, this says once the inbounder lets go of the ball, you can jump over the line, but you still may not touch the ball.

Chuck

....I saw this...
 

I witnessed a Veteran Official call a team warning for delay when an opponent of the Thrower-in slapped the ball out of the throwers hand.
The opponent might have taken a swipe at the ball first without hitting it but in any case there was no whistle untill the ball was hit.
The Veteran Official's partner, a rookie, came up to him and said..."There is no team warning in this situation, it is an automatic "T"!!
The Veteran Official calmly looked both at his partner and the Thrower-in's Coach and explained:
"Per Rule 9-2-11...the opponent(s) of the thrower shall not have any part of his/her person through the inbounds side of the throw-in boundary-line plane until the ball has been released on a throw-in pass." (This guy had a photogenic memory) He went on to say, "Per the PENALTY section of this rule...the first violation of the throw-in boundary-line plane by an opponent(s) of the thrower shall result in a team warning for delay being given...one warning per team per game."
The cagey ol' Veteran was building up to his following statement..."Since the PENALTY section states that the ball becomes dead when the violation occurs, I HAD A DEAD BALL WHEN THE OPPONENT FIRST BROKE THE PLANE AND BEFORE HE EVEN TOUCHED THE BALL!!! Since this is the opponents first "violation" for breaking the plane...it will ONLY BE A WARNING!"
The Rookie Official looked at the Veteran and shook his head saying, "In that case a team would never get a "T" for their "FIRST" slap of the ball because you are saying they broke the plane, thus a violation, before they ever even hit the ball!!!????"
"That is correct", the wiley Vet said.

Dude
P.S. (Maybe I saw this in a dream....) ;)

that veteren official must have missed the T that was called in a NCAA final four or two game a couple of years ago for the same thing. I do not believe that veteren official got that interpretation from any interpreter. Interpreters rule it the other way. They are two different acts and the penalty for each act is different. The act of violating the plane does not automatically cancel the touching even though that vet believes so. He is wrong.

Agreed. Although the rule could be wriitten beter, I believe that is the intent of it.

But for those of you looking for a reason to throw a T, be my guest! ;)

This requires a precise reading of the rules:
 

I believe the correct call is a throw-in violation on B1. B1 has violated 9-2-10: ...Be out of bounds when he/she touches or is touched by the ball after it has been released on a throw-in pass.
B1 has not violated 9-2-11 since no part of his body was "through the inbounds side of the throw-in boundary plane," his entire body was on one side of this plane. This is not the same as being on the inbounds side of the plane and reaching THROUGH (read as intersecting with)it. He is merely on the other side entirely!
Notice also the language used in 10-3-12: "...Reach through the throw-in boundary-line plane and touch or dislodge the ball..."
B1 did not do this either. Therefore, no T is warranted.

So it is Team A's ball on the endline for what would be a designated-spot throw-in, but last year this rule was changed. 7-5-7 now says, "A team retains this privilege if the scoring team commits a violation or a foul and the ensuing throw-in spot would be on the endline." Since B1 violated, Team A may run the endline on this throw-in.

Chuck, that has to include me, too.
The wording of 9-2-10 is what convinced me. As long as that defensive player is in bounds, it's a good play in NFHS.

Re: This requires a precise reading of the rules:
 

I believe the correct call is a throw-in violation on B1. B1 has violated 9-2-10: ...Be out of bounds when he/she touches or is touched by the ball after it has been released on a throw-in pass.
[/B][/QUOTE]I politely and respecfully disagree with the above assertation!

As Mr. Elias and several of his peers have so so ably pointed out already,B1 was not struck by a throw in pass,per se.A throw in pass is one that is released directly into the court,as per Rule 7-6-1. B1 was stuck by a legal OOB pass between team mates on their end line,as defined in Rule 7-5-7.

I must commend you on your diligence in attempting to resolve this rules dilemma, but unfortunately however-in this particular case- you are wrong,a$$hole.

If anyone happens to be offended by the previous post,may I suggest that they do the following:
http://gifs.net/animate/setupz.gif

[Edited by Jurassic Referee on Dec 9th, 2002 at 04:11 AM]

Obviously, I wasn't very precise!
 

I have to agree. Missed that subtle point.
Now I stand by my reasoning for no T, so I must either call a violation for 9-2-11 or nothing. I guess it depends on your definition of "through." I may be willing to consider B1 through the boundary plane here.

PS You get a 10 on the humor meter!