3 second question
 

A1 is throwing in the ball from the endline. A1 passes the ball over the head of A5 who was jumping in the lane, hoping for a dunk or easy lay-up. A5 lands in the lane and turns to look at the ball. The ball hits the floor and is rolling in the frontcourt.

Does A5 have 3 seconds in the lane from the moment the ball hits the ground in the frontcourt?

With the new rule establishing team control on a throw in, it looks like we have frontcourt status of the ball and we have team control. Am I missing something or would this be violation if A5 stayed in the lane 3 seconds?

I don't have my new books yet, but I highly doubt this is a violation...the purpose of adding team control during a throw-in was to not award free throws to the defense on an offensive foul...and to add consistently to the team control definition.

This may well end up being a violation by rule, but I would recommend against calling it that way.

Ah, the Law of Unintended Consequences. :D

MTD, Sr.

Agreed. Don't be a plumber.

I tried to tell you not to mess with the definition of team control, but did anybody listen? Nooooooooooooooooo.

Is it a 3-second violation in NCAA?

3 seconds?

What's that?

"5! Get out of the lane."

Since a three-second violation can only exist during team control in the frontcourt (NFHS 9-7-1), my best guess is, team control in the frontcourt isn't established until you have player control in the frontcourt. During the throw-in, you only have team control, though net yet in the frontcourt.

One flaw in this hypothesis is that a ball that had backcourt status can instantly have frontcourt status without player control in the frontcourt. (Example: Ball thrown from backcourt and lands in frontcourt.) Perhaps the best way to overcome this is to state that frontcourt status cannot exist until team/player control is established inbounds.

Directly from the NFHS 2011-12 Rule Change Powerpoint regarding the team control during the throwin change:
Only team-control fouls occurring during a throw-in were affected by this change.
The change does NOT affect any of the following rules:

• Three seconds in the lane
• Traveling/Dribbling
• Backcourt
• Alternating-possession throw-in rulesMinor edits occurred to some
of these rules for clarification.

Foot-in-mouth disease
 

Check your new rules and case book. They are rife with subtle changes that affect specifically the 3 sec rule and backcourt...

I'm quite aware of that fact...

I'm just pointing out that the thought process of the Committee was not to affect anything other than team control on throw-ins for fouling purposes. Although the wording of the new rule doesnt support their Intent & Purpose of this rule.

And THIS is where we get to the topic of the INTENT of the rule. No matter what the exact words may say, we have their expressed intent that these other areas are to be unaffected. So, if the new wording of the rule seems to suggest the back court violation scenarios have changed, they really haven't according to their intent.

(Translation: They screwed up the wording of the rule and are fudging it under the intent clause).

Thanks
 

Thanks again for the discussion. I'm glad we have clarification on this issue.

Unless there is something to contradict rule 4-12, there is player control during a throw-in:

old 4-12: A player is in control of the ball when he/she is holding or dribbling a live ball inbounds.

new 4-12: A player is in control of the ball when he/she is holding or dribbling a live ball.

Again, unless there is a rule reference, case reference or interpretation stating otherwise, this would mean that, by rule, 3 seconds is in effect during a throw-in.

Clarification and consistency is definitely needed, since some potential repeated violations would be obvious.