Throw-In Location After a Time-Out

[APG]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I believe at one time there were some rules that required the offense to get to the FC or they lost some privileges. I know now that if a timeout is called in the BC that they have to get the ball across within 8 seconds total (or get across before the 16 second mark on the shot clock). This was some time ago when this was the case, but I can ask someone and find out for sure. I just remember someone telling me there was a rule in the NBA that kind of reflects what this guy might be talking about. Then again I do not claim to be sure, just something I remember talking to someone about that I did not always realize.

Peace

Gotcha...you are correct that in the NBA, a team has eight seconds to get it across period unless a team is awarded a new count (T/personal foul on the defense, infection control, delay of game of the defense, kick/punch ball). I actually would like to see something similar to this in NCAA (no buying yourself outta a violation). But yeah, I would be interested in finding out if that was in fact true and what "privileges" a team would have lost.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

... I actually would like to see something similar to this in NCAA (no buying yourself outta a violation)...

Me too. If Team A calls a timeout they only get unexpired portion of backcourt count.

If defensive kicks the ball or causes ball to go OOB or creates a held ball then Team A would get unexpired portion of backcourt count or 5 seconds, whichever is more, but not the full 10.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I actually would like to see something similar to this in NCAA (no buying yourself outta a violation).

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Me too. If Team A calls a timeout they only get unexpired portion of backcourt count.

Why? If a team chooses to burn a time-out, why shouldn't they be able to "buy" themselves a new 10-seconds, or 5-seconds on a throw-in? Team control has ended with the time-out, so how can they be in "continuous" control to continue the count from where it was before the time-out?

This is the same reason I disagree with the rule about not granting a time-out when an airborne player is heading out of bounds. If they want to burn a time-out to save a possession, why should it matter if they are airborne or not? It just makes no sense, and it's inconsistent with the rest of the rules.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Why? If a team chooses to burn a time-out, why shouldn't they be able to "buy" themselves a new 10-seconds, or 5-seconds on a throw-in? Team control has ended with the time-out, so how can they be in "continuous" control to continue the count from where it was before the time-out?

This is the same reason I disagree with the rule about not granting a time-out when an airborne player is heading out of bounds. If they want to burn a time-out to save a possession, why should it matter if they are airborne or not? It just makes no sense, and it's inconsistent with the rest of the rules.

Delayed lane violation...team calls a timeout. We come back from the timeout and STILL enforce the violation at least in NFHS. It's not unprecedented.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Delayed lane violation...team calls a timeout. We come back from the timeout and STILL enforce the violation at least in NFHS. It's not unprecedented.

That is because the violation has already occurred, not that it is maybe about to occur.

[JRutledge]

I think the NBA rule would be applicable if we had a shot clock. All this rule would do at the HS level is cause problems as the official would have to explain how much time is left on the 10 second count. I would not like that kind of rule at the HS level at all for this very reason. Maybe if there was a shot clock then we could have a reference point, but all it takes is a coach not being aware of the time and more issues over when it started or stopped would be at issue. Keep the rule the same.

Peace

[APG]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

I think the NBA rule would be applicable if we had a shot clock. All this rule would do at the HS level is cause problems as the official would have to explain how much time is left on the 10 second count. I would not like that kind of rule at the HS level at all for this very reason. Maybe if there was a shot clock then we could have a reference point, but all it takes is a coach not being aware of the time and more issues over when it started or stopped would be at issue. Keep the rule the same.

Peace

Which was why I said at the NCAA level though I don't think it would be difficult to tell the coach, "You have X amount of seconds to get it across," at the NFHS level. I think this rule should definitely be implemented at the NCAA level.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Why? If a team chooses to burn a time-out, why shouldn't they be able to "buy" themselves a new 10-seconds, or 5-seconds on a throw-in? Team control has ended with the time-out, so how can they be in "continuous" control to continue the count from where it was before the time-out?
...

For the same reason they don't get any more time on the shot clock after a time-out or why a kick ball under 15 seconds only resets the shot clock to 15.

I think the ability to call a time-out to avoid a 10 second backcourt violation is a huge advantage. Not only avoids the violation but also gives them another 10 seconds of game clock to get the ball across. At least I'm proposing they get 5 seconds if the count gets to 6,7,8, or 9. It's not like I'm saying they only should get 1 second after the timeout.

And before you go there it's not the same as avoiding a throw-in violation because when the throw-in resumes the clock will not be running.