Sideline: Forced OOB

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Hawks Coach
MTD was right, we just don't get enough interesting calls these days. Doesn't anybody have something controversial to discuss?

It's the d@mndest plays that get all the responses, isn't it?

[Hawks Coach]

That's one of the most insightful things I've read from anybody on this thread - perhaps we can have 5-6 more pages of response to it

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by BktBallRef

It's the d@mndest plays that get all the responses, isn't it?

This has been a great discussion because it gave us a chance to thrash out what is often misunderstood: incidental contact, fumble, interrupted dribble and OOB, judging contact on one-on-one play, and how to apply all this stuff realistically. And of course the ever present temptation to peel off a T for a player going OOB, which by now we hope no one will ever do without a very, very, very good reason.

Hawk's coach, I added this for you!




[Edited by Dan_ref on Feb 5th, 2003 at 04:51 PM]

[Hawks Coach]

I agree Dan - but this odd play comes up on the board every year and we have the same talk. Probably just need to take a nap I guess, then wake up and have some cookies and milk. I feel better already

[Mregor]

Intentional has everything to do with it. In my mind, (however closed it may be ), if the player intentionally bounces the ball around the defender, it is not an intertupted dribble because it did not "get away" from the dribbler. If it is intentional, they directed it to go a certain way. OOB violation. This thread has gotten so off track from the original situation. In the original situation the way it was posted, I would have no call with either the PC foul or OOB. Somewhere along the lines, someone posted the "intentional" aspect. That is what I was addressing. Got to go to a game. How many pages will this be by morning?

Mregor

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Dan_ref

Uh, Dan? It's beating a dead horse. Beating. Not eating. Beating. Hope this clears it up for you

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias
[/B]

Uh, Dan? It's beating a dead horse. Beating. Not eating. Beating. Hope this clears it up for you [/B][/QUOTE]What's your point?
-in Europe,they do eat dead horses
-you eat a dead cow
-you eat a dead chicken
-you eat a dead pig
-you eat a dead turkey
-dead deer,elk,buffalo,fish,moose,bear,etc.,etc.

The only thing ya gotta keep away from is the BoSox.They've been dead TOO long!

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Mregor
Intentional has everything to do with it.

So, if a player throws intentionally throws the ball off his own backboard, rebounds it and dribbles again, he's double dribbled?

[Hawks Coach]

If by his own you mean the one in his yard, no way! Your court, your rules

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I have just got home from first coaching my younger son's basketball team's practice and then going to a H.S. BSB/SOF umpires RULES/MECHANICS meeting so once again I am going to plead laziness and repost my orginal post in this thread:


"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Sven
I'm confident we've had this discussion before, but I can't locate the thread.

Girls Middle School Game. A1 dribbling fast along sideline in backcourt. B1 establishes legal guarding position near the division line. As A1 dribbles past, there is slight contact and a bump. B1 is not displaced. The contact forces A1 OOB for two to three steps; ball continues to front court along sideline inbounds. A1 comes back inbounds and continues dribble.

B1 was not located directly on the sideline; there was perhaps a foot of space between B1 and the boundary. It was through this gap that A1 dribbled when the contact occurred.

I got nothin'; fans want somethin'. What do you have?

Reference Case Book if you can. Thanks.

Sven
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In the both plays, you have two choices: 1) player control foul on A1 or 2) A1 has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds and in either case Team B will get the ball for a throw-in at the spot of the player control foul by A1 or the spot where A1 caused the ball to go out-of-bounds. I would be inclined to go with the out-of-bounds call myself in both of these plays.

I just got home from officiating and plead to being too tired and too lazy to look up the appropriate rules references and casebook plays/approved rulings. But the rules and casebook/apporved rulings for these two plays would be the same under NFHS, NCAA Mens'/Womens', and FIBA rules. But I am sure somebody will post them tonight or tomorrow."


In both of Sven's plays A1 has dribbled into no man's land. In both cases, we have either a PC foul against A1 or A1 has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds. Several posters have already quoted chapter and verse for me that support my interpretations and I thank them for doing my due diligence. This is not a difficult play and we probably see them a couple of times a game if one of the teams is well coached on the art of playing defense.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Uh, Dan? It's beating a dead horse. Beating. Not eating. Beating. Hope this clears it up for you

What's your point?
-in Europe,they do eat dead horses
-you eat a dead cow
-you eat a dead chicken
-you eat a dead pig
-you eat a dead turkey
-dead deer,elk,buffalo,fish,moose,bear,etc.,etc.

[/QUOTE]

Whoa...I *was* hungry...maybe I'll just have a salad and some tofu.

The only thing ya gotta keep away from is the BoSox.They've been dead TOO long!

More dead carcass. I think I'll skip breakfast too...



[Edited by Dan_ref on Feb 5th, 2003 at 09:44 PM]

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I have just got home from ...blah, blah, blah.....on the art of playing defense.

Thanks Mark but there's no need to re-post. We can all read your original response.

Perhaps you can re-read the thread and see that Sven said there was only slight contact, no advantage/disadvantage and definitely not a foul. Yet you are telling us that the man who saw the play is wrong?

Sad day.

He also states that the dribbler went OOB while the ball continued up the floor. Sounds like an interrupted dribble to me.

[Dan_ref]

Originally posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I have just got home from first coaching my younger son's basketball team's practice and then going to a H.S. BSB/SOF umpires RULES/MECHANICS meeting so once again I am going to plead laziness and repost my orginal post in this thread:


"quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Sven
I'm confident we've had this discussion before, but I can't locate the thread.

Girls Middle School Game. A1 dribbling fast along sideline in backcourt. B1 establishes legal guarding position near the division line. As A1 dribbles past, there is slight contact and a bump. B1 is not displaced. The contact forces A1 OOB for two to three steps; ball continues to front court along sideline inbounds. A1 comes back inbounds and continues dribble.

B1 was not located directly on the sideline; there was perhaps a foot of space between B1 and the boundary. It was through this gap that A1 dribbled when the contact occurred.

I got nothin'; fans want somethin'. What do you have?

Reference Case Book if you can. Thanks.

Sven
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In the both plays, you have two choices: 1) player control foul on A1 or 2) A1 has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds and in either case Team B will get the ball for a throw-in at the spot of the player control foul by A1 or the spot where A1 caused the ball to go out-of-bounds. I would be inclined to go with the out-of-bounds call myself in both of these plays.

I just got home from officiating and plead to being too tired and too lazy to look up the appropriate rules references and casebook plays/approved rulings. But the rules and casebook/apporved rulings for these two plays would be the same under NFHS, NCAA Mens'/Womens', and FIBA rules. But I am sure somebody will post them tonight or tomorrow."


In both of Sven's plays A1 has dribbled into no man's land. In both cases, we have either a PC foul against A1 or A1 has caused the ball to go out-of-bounds. Several posters have already quoted chapter and verse for me that support my interpretations and I thank them for doing my due diligence. This is not a difficult play and we probably see them a couple of times a game if one of the teams is well coached on the art of playing defense.

Hey Mark, with all due respect you can repost this until hell freezes over but it doesn't make it right.

- Incidental contact is not a foul, I don't care where it happens
- It's not a violation if a player goes OOB during his interrupted dribble.

Sven already said he judged the contact to be incidental and he also said the we *perhaps* had an interrupted dribble. I'll agree it's OOB if there was not an interrupted dribble.
These are all consistent with NCAAM, NCAAW & NFHS.

[BktBallRef]

Originally posted by Dan_ref
Hey Mark, with all due respect you can repost this until hell freezes over but it doesn't make it right.

Wow! We said the same thing!

But you said it so much better than me!

[Sven]

Dan_ref said it well:

This has been a great discussion because it gave us a chance to thrash out what is often misunderstood: incidental contact, fumble, interrupted dribble and OOB, judging contact on one-on-one play, and how to apply all this stuff realistically.

Is it any wonder we become addicted to this board...?

I gotta believe that one of the reasons so many of us (who, like myself, seldom post) keep skulking on this forum is to learn from the articulate, well-reasoned arguments on both sides of any given situation.

With few exceptions, there is respect for opposing viewpoints even in the midst of vehement disagreement.

These days that's a rare commodity, but very much appreciated.

Sven