Out of Bounds?
 

Im sure this has been answered before but I couldnt find it so sorry.

Can someone clarify this situation and cite the rule if possible please:

A player is near the sideline dribbling the ball, is forced out of bounds but the ball stays in bounds and player makes no contact with the ball. Player establishes himself in bounds and then is the first to touch the ball.

This is for High school boys.

Thanks

If a player is forced out of bounds, then that sounds like a foul.

Under NFHS rules, a player can not leave the floor for an unauthorized reason (imagine a player who taps the ball around a defender, goes out of bounds, and comes back in). Otherwise, a player can be the first to touch the ball after being out of bounds as long as they have something inbounds and nothing touching out of bounds (they don't have to get both feet inbounds).

Also note that a player dribbling the ball is considered to have caused the ball to be out of bounds if they're touching out of bounds, even if they aren't touching the ball (the difference here is player control).

Depends what you mean by forced.

Fun With An Intern ...
 

Didn't Bill Clinton say something like that?

Billy, I have no idea what this has to do with the topic at hand.

Well it looked like a foul to me too but I cant argue that it was a foul here really can I? The guard is near the sideline with the ball he gets bumped and leaves the ball in bounds the defender falls down so my guard jumps in bounds and touches the ball.

I guess I could estimate my guards mass and velocity and calculate his vector, then do the same for the defender. Give an estimated impact coeficient and we could determine whether it was or wasnt a foul... but a foul wasnt called.

My player was bumped and lost his balance, left the ball in bounds, returned and placed two feet in bounds and was the first to touch the ball.

Thanks if someone could lend a helpful answer...

A player can be the first to touch the ball if his momentum carried him out of bounds as long as he is inbounds (meaning something inbounds and nothing out of bounds). This would not be a violation for leaving the court for an unauthorized reason.

And remember, most of the posters here are officials and our first assumption is you were an official...which is why we asked if there should have been a foul or not when you said forced out. No disrespect was meant by the statement.

If a foul was not called then it is reasonable to assume that the official did not think there was a foul to be called. Defense has rights too and just because there was contact does not mean a foul would have been the right thing to call. It also could be an out of bounds violation if your player was still considered a dribbler even though they were not in contact of the ball. Actually there is too much speculation anyway as none of us saw the play live or had video to show us what should have been called.

Peace

Thus the generic original question rather than explaining the exact occurance in question... peace?

Etymology 101 ...
 

Dueling definitions of certain words.

Okay, maybe third time's the charm.

Under high school rules, there is no first to touch violation after being out of bounds. Now there may be a violation for leaving for an unauthorized reason...which may make it appear as a first to touch violation, but under NF rules, there is no such creature.

Who You Gonna Call ???
 

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6230/...473e048e_m.jpg

If a player's momentum carries him or her off the court, he or she can be the first player to touch the ball after returning inbounds. That player must not have left the court voluntarily and must immediately return inbounds. That player must have something in and nothing out. It is not necessary to have both feet back inbounds. It is a violation for a player to intentionally leave the court for an unauthorized reason.

Perhaps you should have posted this the first time as opposed to some off color joke that was neither funny, neccesary, or had anything to do with the thread.

Htbt
 

Quote: "My player was bumped and lost his balance, left the ball in bounds, returned and placed two feet in bounds and was the first to touch the ball."

So, if the contact caused your player to go out of bounds, while holding the ball, I think, most often, the bump would be judged as sufficient to call a foul. Similarly, if the ball handler, holding the ball, were bumped and the contact caused him to travel, I think, most often, the contact would be judged sufficient to call a foul.
In the scenario from the OP, since there is no "first to touch" rule in HS, some degree of judgement may enter, since the player leaving the court was not a violation, and the player was able to continue normal basketball actions, after returning inbounds.
With the quoted additional explanation of the play, I would be inclined to call the foul.

Yes if the defender did something illegal. Being "bumped" is subjective and in this case likely "coach speak." If a defender was moving legally and then the ball handler makes contact, then I would not penalize the defender for something they were legally doing, which is why I said you HTBT.

Peace

The relevant Case Book plays for the OP's situation can be found under 7.1.1

Case Book Plays ...
 

7.1.1 SITUATION B: A1 blocks a pass near the end line. The ball falls to the
floor inbounds, but A1, who is off balance, steps off the court. A1 returns
inbounds, secures control of the ball and dribbles. RULING: Legal. A1 did not
leave the court voluntarily and did not have control of the ball when he/she did.
This situation is similar to one in which A1 makes a try from under the basket and
momentum carries A1 off the court. If the try is unsuccessful, A1 may come back
onto the court and regain control since A1 did not leave the court voluntarily and
did not have control of the ball when he/she did.

7.1.1 SITUATION C: A1 blocks a pass near the sideline and the ball goes into
A1’s front court. A1’s momentum carries him/her out of bounds. He/she immediately
returns inbounds, secures control of the ball, dribbles, shoots, and scores.
RULING: Legal. (4-35-1a; 7-1-2; 9-3)

7.1.1 SITUATION D: A1 jumps from inbounds to retrieve an errant pass near a
boundary line. A1 catches the ball while in the air and tosses it back to the court.
A1 lands out of bounds and (a) is the first to touch the ball after returning
inbounds; (b) returns inbounds and immediately dribbles the ball; or (c) picks up
the ball after returning to the court and then begins a dribble. RULING: Legal in
(a) and (b). Illegal in (c) as the controlled toss of the ball to the court by A1 constitutes
the start of a dribble, dribbling a second time after picking up the ball is
an illegal dribble violation. (4-15-5; 4-15-6d; 4-35; 9-5)

IF the player was still driblbing, then it's an OOB violation.

IF the player left of his own volition, then it's a violation.

IF it was an interrupted dribble AND the player left due to momentum, etc, then it's a legal play.

Apparently Mondays are much better for relevant answers... Sundays must be used for semantical arguments.

Thanks so much for the relevant replies and the case book citation.

Actually your question was somewhat vague and unclear when you first posted it. So you got the answers you got because people were (and still) trying to figure out what you mean.

Peace

Don't be so critical. Your post left some points open for discussion, so they got discussed. It's how we roll.

Let me add a question and an answer.

1. What level was this (just curious)?

2. I've seen very good officials make this call (first to touch), so it's possible it was simply a bad call. If the player's momentum took him OOB, even if it was a legal bump by the defender, it's likely a legal play as long as he didn't maintain his dribble the entire time. As has been noted, if the official deemed that he went OOB on purpose to get around a defender, and made the appropriate call, it would easily appear as if he made the dreaded "first to touch" call.

Definitely HTBT, but based on the description, I think you could make a good case for a PC foul. If the defender was near the sideline and there was not enough space between sideline and defender for the dribbler to get through without contact (Rule 10-6-7) the dribbler is responsible for any contact (I believe the rule once said if there was less than 3 feet but it doesn't read that way now). If that contact causes the defender to hit the floor, I say PC as they were disadvantaged because they were knocked to the floor while the dribbler retrieved the ball. Just another thought, but since it's a HTBT, this is another possibility.

Roger