player control
 

Having a discussion on weather you have player control on a throw in. the wording in the rule changed with team control on a throw in rule. To ahve player control you must be holding or dribbling a live ball. the old wording said inbounds. now it does not. What say u? player control on throw in?

Is it really relevant? I suppose if the foul occured on the thrower-in, u could rule player control. Whether player or team control, the outcome is the same ... no free throws if the other team is in the bonus.

I say yes.

Under the new rules changes, yes. Doesn't seem to really matter, though.

How is the thrower supposed to commit a player-control foul?

Not as hard as you might think.

Although as soon as he touches the defender in bounds, he commits a throw in violation. So, the only way I'm calling the foul is if he goes intentional or flagrant.

Actually there's nothing under the list of throw-in violations in Rule 9 which deals with the thrower touching the defender, only the other way around. He/She can't leave the designated spot nor can they walk the ball onto the court so by the time they did either of those things they wouldn't have player control anymore.

Really?

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

9.2.5 SITUATION B: A1 has the ball out of bounds for a throw-in and is being guarded by B1. Before releasing the ball, A1 loses his/her balance, reaches out and puts his/her hand on B1 (who is inbounds) in an effort to regain his/her balance.

RULING: Throw-in violation by A1. A1 is required to remain out of bounds until releasing the throw-in pass. When A1 touches an inbounds player, he/she has inbound status. However, if the contact on B1 is illegal, a personal foul shall be called. (9-2-10 Note)

See 9-2-10 note.

I"m confused
 

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.

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.

My mistake for not reading that thoroughly. But to get back to the original question, I still can't see how a thrower can commit a player-control foul.

Thrower A1 pushes B1 in the chest to create more room for the throw-in.

Yep, I'd call the PC foul on this rather than the violation. Same concept as calling the foul when the defender reaches across the plane and fouls the thrower.

So this is me becoming the Devil's Advocate: if the thrower and defender are that close that the thrower is able to push the defender, one of two things has happened:

1. The thrower has moved too far forward during the throw-in, which is a violation (I'm basing this on the throw-in taking place at any time other than after a made/awarded field goal or free throw).
2. The defender has moved too close to the thrower, in which case it's a warning or technical foul on the defense.

I can't see it happening in a situation where a team can run the endline - though I guess it could - because the thrower can run away from the defender.

It'd be very easy for my situation to occur...the defender can get right up to the throw-in plane, and the thrower can get close enough and still reach out without stepping inbounds. You just never see this play because a thrower's natural inclination when pressured like above is to step back away from the pressure rather than try to create more space.

False choice. In this case, only one player is prohibited from breaking the plane. And even if he breaks it, we're told to call the foul if contact is the immediate result of the violation.

And in that case it's not a PC foul.

Right, but I'm retracting that statement as of now. I can see calling a run of the mill PC foul if A1 pushes off to clear space (similar to a post player trying to create a shot).

And I agree that calling the foul rather than the violation is justified by the same reasoning as calling an INT/T on B for contacting the thrower/ball instead of the violation for breaking the plane, though in each case technically the violation happened first.

Just My Opinion ...
 

Sounds like an intentional foul to me, not a player control foul.

Different/more severe than guard A2, without the ball, shoving their defender away to pop out and receive a pass? I've never called that intentional.

You can't envision a player pushing an opponent in the chest without it being an intentional foul? :confused:

Did I Actually Say Thrower-In-Er ??? Twice ???
 

Yes I can. But not when a thrower-in-er pushes the thrower-in-er's defender in the chest. It's not a "basketball play". I'm not going to bet my house on my interpretation, it's just my off the cuff opinion.

Sounds like about 90% of the fouls in most games. A player is in the way of the team/player that wishes to make a play and they use contact to get open and make the pass....that sounds like a basketball play to me.

Camron Rust, You're Probably Correct ...
 

Fouling from out of bounds? 90%? Really?

It's an "uncommon play" but I'd say it's very much a "basketball play". If a player with the ball committed the same action at the top of the key because they've used their dribble and the defender is right on top of ballhandler one wouldn't bat an eye (assuming nothing excessive).

The fact that he is out of bounds is totally irrelevant.

Why is this a violation? The thrower can only move 3 feet horizontally but they can move as far back or up as they want. Am I wrong?

Why does the player location matter? Maybe it's 94.7%???

It's The Black Line All The Way Around ...
 

Hey. I'm not the one who said, and I quote, "Sounds like about 90% of the fouls in most games".

99% of the foul calls that I make in my games are made involving players who are inbounds. And I still maintain that I may be wrong on my interpretation, so you don't have to convince me.

I Maintain That It's A Much Smaller Percentage ...
 

Maybe it doesn't. Probably doesn't.

The esteemed Forum member Camron Rust stated that when a thrower-in-er pushes the thrower-in-er's defender in the chest it "sounds like about 90% of the fouls in most games".

I think the push was the 90%, not the out of bounds.

Yup.

A Man Of Few Words, Actually, Two Men Of Few Words ...
 

Yup.