The Official Forum

The Official Forum (https://forum.officiating.com/)
-   Basketball (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/)
-   -   NCAA OOB Case Play? (https://forum.officiating.com/basketball/87804-ncaa-oob-case-play.html)

Camron Rust Wed Feb 08, 2012 12:13pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 821536)
Actually A.R. 182 states a floor-violation by an opponent does not cause the throw-in to end but ensuing throw-in is from a spot nearest to the violation.

Rule 9-15 addresses where throw-ins will occur when penalizing violations 9-3 through 9-14:

Art. 1. The ball shall become dead or remain dead when a violation occurs. The ball shall be awarded to a nearby opponent for a throw-in at a designated spot nearest to where the violation occurred.

The play from the OP falls under 9-4-1 and 9-5-2b so should be administered as stated in 9-15-1 and A. R. 182.

Good additional detail.....thx for the backup....but 7-6-2 does clearly say the throwin ends when it touches an OOB player. Other types of floor violations (kicking, for example) do not cause the throwin to end...only OOB violations. The difference is that a kick is not a legal touch in any location where catching the ball is legal, but the location happens to be illegal.

Raymond Wed Feb 08, 2012 02:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust (Post 821595)
Good additional detail.....thx for the backup....but 7-6-2 does clearly say the throwin ends when it touches an OOB player. Other types of floor violations (kicking, for example) do not cause the throwin to end...only OOB violations. The difference is that a kick is not a legal touch in any location where catching the ball is legal, but the location happens to be illegal.

OK, I see what you are saying now and agree.

JetMetFan Wed Feb 08, 2012 02:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1 (Post 821492)
JetMetFan, if you could come up with that ruling from Debbie, I'd really appreciate it. I don't think I want to bug Art Hyland with this one.

Drum roll please...I had to e-mail Debbie Williamson again since I couldn't find the original message but...

She said the ball will be put into play at the spot where A2 caught the ball with no time running off the clock.

Scrapper1 Wed Feb 08, 2012 03:38pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 821693)
Drum roll please...I had to e-mail Debbie Williamson again since I couldn't find the original message but...

She said the ball will be put into play at the spot where A2 caught the ball with no time running off the clock.

Any chance you could PM a copy of the actual email? Thanks!

JetMetFan Thu Feb 09, 2012 01:51am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1 (Post 821708)
Any chance you could PM a copy of the actual email? Thanks!

Hey Scrapper -

It wouldn't be the most exciting e-mail. I didn't ask her for the rule citations. I just gave her the scenario you laid out and told her I remembered her saying the ball goes to the spot where A2 violated and that the clock wouldn't run. All she did was confirm my memory was correct :)

dahoopref Thu Feb 09, 2012 11:56am

Quote:

Originally Posted by JetMetFan (Post 821895)
Hey Scrapper -

It wouldn't be the most exciting e-mail. I didn't ask her for the rule citations. I just gave her the scenario you laid out and told her I remembered her saying the ball goes to the spot where A2 violated and that the clock wouldn't run. All she did was confirm my memory was correct :)

Great discussion. I'm curious what that rational would be for not taking at least 0.3 seconds off the clock. If the ball was legally touched, although he was OB, shouldn't some time come off?

APG Thu Feb 09, 2012 12:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahoopref (Post 822051)
Great discussion. I'm curious what that rational would be for not taking at least 0.3 seconds off the clock. If the ball was legally touched, although he was OB, shouldn't some time come off?

I don't believe NCAA has a .3 rule (as far as timing goes) like the NBA does...but even so, the ball was legally touched, yet the violation occurred simultaneously. I'd agree with taking no time off the clock.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Thu Feb 09, 2012 01:33pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 821460)
About twenty-five years ago, the NFHS ruled this a throwin violation. Then it was changed to an out of bounds violation. I'm sure that Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. will be moseying along shortly to confirm, or deny, my interpretation. Right now he's probably taking his early morning nap.


I am joining this thread late, but Billy is correct about the NFHS "back and forth" change that was made.

That said, if we ignore the few years when the NFHS rules said it was a throw-in violation the NFHS and NCAA rules have been identical for since at least the 1963-64 (my earliest NBCUSC Rules Book).

I am not going to climb up into the attic but I am pretty sure that there is at least one Casebook Play in an NBCUSC Casebook that covers this play and I am also pretty sure that there is a NFHS Casebook Play that covers this play and they are both the same: OOB violation by A2.

NCAA A.R. #182 does not apply to this play because the violation is a kicking violation which is considered illegal contact with the ball. The act of catching the ball while standing out of bounds is not illegal. Since there has never been an NCAA A.R. that covers the play in the OP, the NBCUSC Casebook Play is the applicable Casebook Play for the NCAA Rules because when the NBCUSC split into the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees, it was agreed that NBCUSC Casebook Plays would continue to apply until a rule was adopted that would change the ruling of the existing Casebook Play.

Raymond Thu Feb 09, 2012 02:55pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. (Post 822092)
...NCAA A.R. #182 does not apply to this play because the violation is a kicking violation which is considered illegal contact with the ball. The act of catching the ball while standing out of bounds is not illegal. Since there has never been an NCAA A.R. that covers the play in the OP, the NBCUSC Casebook Play is the applicable Casebook Play for the NCAA Rules because when the NBCUSC split into the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees, it was agreed that NBCUSC Casebook Plays would continue to apply until a rule was adopted that would change the ruling of the existing Casebook Play.

A. R. 182 may not apply but 9-15-1 addresses it sufficiently. Throw-in at a spot nearest the violation.

Camron Rust Thu Feb 09, 2012 04:35pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by dahoopref (Post 822051)
Great discussion. I'm curious what that rational would be for not taking at least 0.3 seconds off the clock. If the ball was legally touched, although he was OB, shouldn't some time come off?

Why would it? The event that would start the clock was the same event that would stop the clock. Time might come off if one official signaled the start and another signaled the stop, but that doesn't mean time has to come off....particularly when no time elapsed between the starting and stopping events.

BillyMac Thu Feb 09, 2012 06:30pm

Rip Van Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BillyMac (Post 821460)
I'm sure that Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. will be moseying along shortly to confirm, or deny, my interpretation. Right now he's probably taking his early morning nap.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. (Post 822092)
I am joining this thread late, but Billy is correct about the NFHS "back and forth" change that was made.

And I'd bet my house that I was correct about the nap also.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Thu Feb 09, 2012 08:54pm

Rip Van Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. ...

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by BillyMac
I'm sure that Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. will be moseying along shortly to confirm, or deny, my interpretation. Right now he's probably taking his early morning nap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.
I am joining this thread late, but Billy is correct about the NFHS "back and forth" change that was made.

And I'd bet my house that I was correct about the nap also.


Billy made his post above at 07:48amEST on Wed., Feb. 08, 2012, I had just finished a 60 minute nap at the Eastbound Service Plaza at MM-90 on the Indiana Toll Road (I-80/I-90), on the homeward bound leg of my bi-weekly courier run with Chicago Public Schools payroll. So yes, I had just taken my early morning nap, :D. So give Billy a cigar, :D.

MTD, Sr.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Thu Feb 09, 2012 09:12pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef (Post 822164)
A. R. 182 may not apply but 9-15-1 addresses it sufficiently. Throw-in at a spot nearest the violation.


BadNewsRef:

You are missing the point of my post: That is, with the exception of a couple of years in the 1990's (when the NFHS considered the violation being discussed a throw-in violation), the NFHS and NCAA rule for this play has been the same for over 50 years pre-dating the NBCUSC split into the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees.

While I do not recall an NCAA Casebook Play (When the split was made the NCAA did publish a Casebook and then went to Approved Rulings within the Rules Book.) or Approved Ruling pertaining to the play we are discussing, I am pretty sure that a NFHS Casebook Play has been published at one time or another.

I am also pretty sure that a NBCUSC Casebook Play that has been published pertaining to this play and that in the absence of an NCAA Casebook Play or Approved Ruling the NBCUSC is NCAA Ruling for this play (See my Post #23 as to why the NBCUSC Casebook applies to theNCAA Rules.).

MTD, Sr.

Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. Fri Feb 10, 2012 09:53am

BillyMac's Picture.
 
What happened to BillyMac's picture of JurrasicRef and me?

MTD, Sr.

BillyMac Fri Feb 10, 2012 06:01pm

I Really Didn't Expect To See It When I Got Home From Work ...
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. (Post 822301)
On the homeward bound leg of my bi-weekly courier run with Chicago Public Schools payroll.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. (Post 822457)
What happened to BillyMac's picture of JurrasicRef and me?

Inappropriate. Off topic. Not funny. Not funny enough. Waste of band width. Offensive to Jurassic Referee. Nothing to do with basketball. Nothing to do with basketball officiating. Unconstitutional. Illegal. Immoral. Waste of time. Earthquake. A terrible flood. Locusts!

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3335/...7c8c4002_z.jpg


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:45pm.



Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1