Contradiction?
 

I'm also reading 4.41.4 Situation B

A1's three point try is short and below ring level when it hits the shoulder of B1 and rebounds to the backboard and through the basket.

The three-point try ended when it was obviously short and below the ring. However, since a live ball went through the basket, two points are scored.

But if it was a pass that originated outside the 3 point line by A and it hit B in the shoulder and went through the basket, then it's 3 points according to 5.2.1 situation C.

I don't think 5.2.1C is intended for a thrown ball that had no chance of going in without Team B's deflection. I believe the intent of this caseplay is to show that B's touch will not nullify A's throw behind the three point line. I most certainly could be wrong though.

Negative
 

I believe the difference is, in one situation the defender touched the ball & in the other the ball (obviously short - try ended) touched the defender.

:eek:

Good luck explaining that one to a coach. I think you are correct about the distinction though.

You agree that a try that has clearly ended cannot be a three when it is certain that it is not successful, but you think a pass which never had a chance to go in in the first place is a 3 if deflected in?

That's how I'm reading 4.41.4 situation B and 5.2.1

I think I misread the play originally, too.

If the original "throw" has any chance of going in the basket (there's enough force to get the ball above 9 feet and the direction will take it within 10 feet of the basket), then count it as three.

If the original "throw" has no chance, then count it as two.

The rule change was put in place to allow for a "missed alley-oop" pass to count for three points.

Once we realize the distinction between who runs the court & who runs the team, explaining tough calls to coaches require no luck whatsoever...

Its never a debate, he either buys it or he doesnt. I never hesitate to invite non-believers to the rules class in October! But I never hold class on the court Nov-Mar. IJS

So to answer the OP
3 and 2?

Depends what kind of pass we have. A bounce pass into the post that is deflected and goes in is 2pts. A chest pass into the post that never was above the rim until after the deflection is a 2. An "alley-oop" type pass that was thrown toward the basket but was deflected might well be scored 3. A player on the wing who is obviously throwing an overhead skip pass to the other side of the court that is deflected and goes in IMO is still a 2. Rule 4-41-2 does bring the element of an officials judgement regarding a try for goal.
What if the passer/thrower is fouled after the deflection and the ball goes in/misses? Do you count it and give 1 FT? Or 3 FTs if the deflection doesn't go in? Judgment is required in these situations.

This is technically true since 4.41.4 says "the try ends when the throw is successful, when it is certain the throw is unsuccessful, ..."

But I think it's easier to explain from the angle of it being clear that the try was unsuccessful. (short of the rim, CLEARLY wide of the goal).

It's really just wordsmithing but I think starting down the path of saying the defensive touch made it go opens you up for more questions than just explaining the try had ended.

Depends... was it a lob over the top or a short/bounce pass into the post.

Okay now we're all back on the same page.

Just the way the original post was written I was picturing a short pass into the near post that got deflected and everyone was saying 3 and 3...that threw me off.

In play 2. Pass was just a simple chest pass that did not hit the floor. Pass was thrown about 6 foot high and both offense and defense had their backs to the basket on the block. Ball hit one of the two players and deflected into the basket. Both players were inside the 3 point line.

Hold up, wait a minute... this isnt what you said originally.