FED Reaching Through the Plane

[deecee]

ANY contact with the thrower in is an IT. Contact with the ball out of bounds is a tech. I don't believe a warning is required for that. the warning would be for simply breaking the plane.

I would not asses a T and a warning and I should double check the books but I don't think they mention it done that way either.

[APG]

Originally Posted by deecee

ANY contact with the thrower in is an IT. Contact with the ball out of bounds is a tech. I don't believe a warning is required for that. the warning would be for simply breaking the plane.

I would not asses a T and a warning and I should double check the books but I don't think they mention it done that way either.

I'm issuing the warning and T...use the case book play mentioning the intentional foul as guidance if you need.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by deecee

ANY contact with the thrower in is an IT. Contact with the ball out of bounds is a tech. I don't believe a warning is required for that. the warning would be for simply breaking the plane.

I would not asses a T and a warning and I should double check the books but I don't think they mention it done that way either.

1) Contact with the inbounder (aka "thrower-in") is an IP, not an IT.

2) If the contact (with the ball or the inbounder) happens in the same act as breaking the plane, it's BOTH the foul AND the warning.

[chseagle]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

What page in the case book? Thanks for the bread crumbs

Page 88 in the case book

[The_Rookie]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

10.3.10 SITUATION D: A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1 reaches through
the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hands. Earlier in the game,
Team B had received a team warning for delay. RULING: Even though Team B had
already been issued a warning for team delay, when B1breaks the plane and subsequently
contacts the ball in the thrower’s hand, it is considered all the same act
and the end result is penalized. A player technical foul is assessed to B1; two free
throws and a division line throw-in for Team A will follow. The previous warning
for team delay still applies with any subsequent team delay resulting in a team
technical foul. (4-47; 9-2-10 Penalty 3; 10-1-5c)

Similar situation but instead of contact we have a breaking of the plane by defender after a warning was give to team for delay. Is this a TEAM TECHNICAL?

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by The_Rookie

Similar situation but instead of contact we have a breaking of the plane by defender after a warning was give to team for delay. Is this a TEAM TECHNICAL?

You don't penalize a player with a technical for a delay when the TEAM has received a warning. The only time you would assess a T to the player is if he reaches through the plane and touches the ball while the thrower still has it. In that case, it's a T on the defender and a warning is issued if there's not previously been a warning.

Rookie, I'm not trying to be ugly but all these questions you ask are in the Rule Book and Case Book. Do you not study these two books?

May I suggest you study and then ask questions about things you don't understand as opposed to asking about plays that are specifically covered in the Case Book? I think you would learn and retain it more efficiently. After all, we're not going to be on the floor when you need a question answered.

Just a thought.

[The_Rookie]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

You don't penalize a player with a technical for a delay when the TEAM has received a warning. The only time you would assess a T to the player is if he reaches through the plane and touches the ball while the thrower still has it. In that case, it's a T on the defender and a warning is issued if there's not previously been a warning.

Rookie, I'm not trying to be ugly but all these questions you ask are in the Rule Book and Case Book. Do you not study these two books?

May I suggest you study and then ask questions about things you don't understand as opposed to asking about plays that are specifically covered in the Case Book? I think you would learn and retain it more efficiently. After all, we're not going to be on the floor when you need a question answered.

Just a thought.

I am going thru a 200 question exam and I am doing a dumpster dive into the book and there are things that don't make sense to me or that I need clarification on...so I am leaning on the Vets for some guidance