Designated spot Throw-in muffed??

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by fiasco

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?

The concept of a "suspended throw-in" has no basis or definition in the rules.

The throw-in has a start and an end. If it ends with a TO, foul, or violation, then another throw-in will (or might) start. Since you don't "resume" a throw-in, what sense is there in thinking of one as "suspended"?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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.

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)

BTW, I did not read this play as everything took place outside of the boundary. It does not say either way, so I was thinking the fumble took place onto the court.

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)

[JRutledge]

Bob, this is why I am asking. It does not seem to be clear that there should be a time out allowed. I am not stuck to my position either, just want to know what the rules support either way.

Peace

[Brick43]

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?

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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)

Well, it's an immediate violation if the player was clearly and solely at fault for the fumble. The case book indicates that if the ball was fumbled in the process of the official administering the ball, there is no violation.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Brick43

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?

I read it as in bounds because the case play with the very same situation on a FT gives the same ruling (9.9.1).

But you can bounce a ball out of bounds as well on a throw-in. So I do not see going to get a ball as leaving the designated spot area automatically. They can move their feet, just as long as they do not leave the area over the spot.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

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.

If it is bouncing around OOB after being inadvertently dropped, the throw in is in progress...and disposal is still in effect...timeout OK. Disposal starts when the ball is made available and continues until the throwin is released.

[billyu2]

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)

[bainsey]

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.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bainsey

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.

rpp

[fiasco]

Originally Posted by billyu2

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)

That's what I was trying to get at earlier in a roundabout kind of way.

[Brick43]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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)

This was the exact point made by my counter in this discussion.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by bainsey

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.

Incorrect....it must be in "control of a player".....player control that is.....so, if they fumble it, it may be in team control, but not player control. So, we're back to disposal.

[billyu2]

[QUOTE=Camron Rust;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?

[Camron Rust]

[QUOTE=billyu2;798012]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

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?

Yes....the count, throw in restrictions (aside from the thrower being the first to touch the ball inbounds), the ability to call a timeout, etc....have all ended. Any player except the thrower can touch/grab the ball. But the "throwin", of course, ends when it is touched.

This WAS a throwin pass...even if it was ugly as the ball left a player's hands on the throwin. It went into the court. When a player touches it, the throwin will have ended.