player control

[Toren]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Read the note in 9-2-10. Also case 9.2.5B.

Didn't we just have a pretty lengthy thread about thrower-in A1 touching A2 with the ball and then pulling it back?

I thought the consensus was no violation. It appears Snags has some caseplays that would point to a violation now.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Toren

Didn't we just have a pretty lengthy thread about thrower-in A1 touching A2 with the ball and then pulling it back?

I thought the consensus was no violation. It appears Snags has some caseplays that would point to a violation now.

As I commented in that thread: the rationale given in the case for calling this a violation is that the player carried the ball into the court, which is absurd. Touching a player inbounds does not give the thrower inbounds status.

I'm fine with calling this a violation, but it will need to be defined independently.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by mbyron

As I commented in that thread: the rationale given in the case for calling this a violation is that the player carried the ball into the court, which is absurd. Touching a player inbounds does not give the thrower inbounds status.

I'm fine with calling this a violation, but it will need to be defined independently.

Right. While it's hard for a near hand-off to occur without player-to-player contact, I see no reason to extend this peculiar rule to the play from the other thread. If A1 doesn't actually touch another player on the court before he releases the throw in pass; he hasn't done anything wrong.

[Toren]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Right. While it's hard for a near hand-off to occur without player-to-player contact, I see no reason to extend this peculiar rule to the play from the other thread. If A1 doesn't actually touch another player on the court before he releases the throw in pass; he hasn't done anything wrong.

Fine distinction. Ball v Hand I suppose. I can live with that. Putting it into my database that way.