Originally Posted by fiasco (Post 797941)

If the throw-in starts when the ball is at the player's disposal, shouldn't it stand to reason that the throw-in is suspended when the ball is no longer at the player's disposal?

Originally Posted by JRutledge (Post 797943)

I am willing to follow any such directive, but we cannot say something is when it does not fit the definition. Also the term fumble has a definition too.

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 797948)

Frankly, I think the strongest argument for "TO NOT allowed" is by extending the similar play that happens during a FT -- here, it's an immediate violation. (9.1.1A)

Originally Posted by Brick43 (Post 797953)

Thanks for all the input. In the case I read it as fumbled out of bounds, that is why it is a violation to go pick it up. They have stepped outside the 3' wide designated spot? If the ball was fumbled onto the court then A-1 could move outside this area.

And I as well wonder when does at the disposal end?

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 797967)

from where i sit, this oob-control rule change creates a redundancy in 5-8-3a, which says a time out can be granted when the ball is either "at the disposal or in control of a player of his/her team." now, the former begats the latter, so you don't even need to mention "at disposal," do you?

If that rule were to be cleaned up and just said "in control of a player," that would settle this one. Fumble = no control = no time out. Until that day, i'd check your local listings.

Originally Posted by billyu2 (Post 797966)

So if the thrower-in fumbles the ball and it is no longer at his disposal then we would have to stop the throw-in count correct? I don't think so. If the throw-in count continues then the ball must still be at the player's disposal, so grant the time out. (assuming the fumbled ball is OOB and the player did not leave the designated spot)

Originally Posted by bob jenkins (Post 797948)

Yep -- "accidental loss of player control." Until this year, that would have meant "inbounds" so it wouldn't have been applicable to the play at hand.

I'd suggest that the deletion of the word "inbounds" from the definition of PC was NOT meant to change the definition of fumble (and is another one of the unintended consequences of the way they tried to change the TC Foul rule)



Interesting. I clearly assumed that it was all OOB. If the ball goes inbounds, then it's either play on or a throw-in violation.

Frankly, I think the strongest argument for "TO NOT allowed" is by extending the similar play that happens during a FT -- here, it's an immediate violation. (9.1.1A)

Originally Posted by bainsey (Post 797967)

From where I sit, this OOB-control rule change creates a redundancy in 5-8-3a, which says a time out can be granted when the ball is either "at the disposal OR in control of a player of his/her team." Now, the former begats the latter, so you don't even need to mention "at disposal," do you?

If that rule were to be cleaned up and just said "in control of a player," that would settle this one. Fumble = no control = no time out. Until that day, I'd check your local listings.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 797964)

If the ball is bouncing around ON the court as was previously, I contend that the throwin has ended. The thrower may not have intended to make the throwin, but they did when they released the ball, deliberately or inadvertently, onto the court.

QUOTE]

Camron, did you mean the throw in count ended? If the player fumbled the ball into the court the ball still must be legally touched for the throw-in to end, right?