Last night was the last of my clock duties. (Did not go well AT ALL but that is a story for another post.)

I’m doing JV girls before varsity game. After a timeout, A1 is in-bounding at the division line and I am trail. After she throws it in she turns and runs down the outside of the line, by a good 2 feet, and comes in below the foul line extended. Tweet, hand goes up, and then I give the “T” sign. Ms. H. Monkey goes nuts, (she has been riding us all night) demanding what her player did wrong. I tell her and she quiets down. This makes me think even more that it was a designed play.

First question is should I have used the sweep of the arm like is done for 3 seconds to signify ???? whatever? An next, what is the groups thoughts on the definition of “Directly onto the court?”

2 feet from the division line to below the FT line? Anyway, if you ever feel the need to call this again there's no signal, just explain what you got to the coach.

Wow, I've just been reading and trying to understand that rule better. I've seen some plays run by teams under the basket where a player goes out of bounds by design. I can not remember ever seeing this called in all the games I've seen or coached in grammer school and HS, but I'm wondering now if it is simply misunderstood or under-called.

I was having a discussion with some fellow coaches and I was telling them that, having just read the rules and passing the officials test, it is illegal to move OOB on purpose. Of course they told me I was nuts and there was no such rule. That's the main reason I've been gathering information on this rule.

Does anyone know if this rule applies to the defense also? In other words if someone sets a pick with one foot in bounds and the other OOB, would that be leagal or not?

RecRef,
Point at the spot where A1 violated and then point the new direction. Explain as necessary.

If you judge "an advantage gained", then call it, but don't look for small amounts of mucous hanging of someone's nose.
mick

Oh boy, now you've done it! This one always gets a huge response! :)

WindyCityRef,
I have no problem with a defender stepping on the line.
mick

Ok, but what if one foot is OOB so that the players torso is on the line? In other words half their body is out and the other half is in?

WindyCityRef,
I have no problem with a defender's torso being being directly over the line.
mick

Any case book situation I've ever seen on this rule concerns the offense getting an advantage by intentionally stepping way off the floor (either to deceive the defense into "forgetting about them" or to avoid a violation like three in the key). Personally, I'm not going to call it unless the offense gained an advantage that they would have not otherwise got without going out of bounds. Even then, I'd be inclined to warn the first time.

That being the case, my main point is that this rule was <i><b>not </i></b>designed to prevent the defense from having a foot (or even more than just a foot) out of bounds. Using the sideline as an "additional defender" is good defense and should not be penalized.

Z

IMHO, that is not a legal guarding position, and I would call a block if there is any contact.

OK,
 

If the defender takes a position with a foot on or outside the boundry line and there is contact between the offensive player with the ball and the defender do you have a call?

I promise I will NOT comment further on the original call.

Re: OK,
 

You can possibly have any one of the following:
1)blocking or holding foul on the defender.
2)PC foul on the player with the ball.
3)If the contact is slight and involves player/player, you have a "no call" and keep playing.
4)If the contact is ball/defender OOB,then the ball is OOB off of the defender,and the offense gets the ball OOB for a throw-in.

The call depends on the official's interpretation of what actually happened.Comment away.:D

Re: Re: OK,
 

JR

In #1 - 3 you regard the defender as if s/he has established a legal guarding position whereever they are on the court. No problem: 4-23 (Guarding) does not specifically state that the defender must be within the confines of the court to establish legal guarding position.

#4 is the only situation the defender's status on the court comes into play and it is OOB. No Problem: I certainly do not view this situation as basis for a "T" under 10-3-4 (Leaving the court for an unauthorized reason). I believe this action does not violate the "intent" nor the "letter of the law" within this rule.

Therefore, I agree with your position on all four situations.

Actually,Willie,#3 & 4 are right out of casebook play 7.1.2SitB(a). No T is mentioned in either scenario.

JR
 

Thank you.