DoG on Inbound throw-in

[Multiple Sports]

God.............. I know that I am going to get killed for supporting Rut!!!!

Big T - just a thought here ( the RULES GUYS) won't like this, but try this on for size.

A1 reaches through the plane and hits the ball, either a pass or in the inbounders hand, well he violated when he reached through the plane. You can always blow your whistle and call the violation for breaking the plane and not call an unwarranted T. You will know when player is actually attempting to reach through the plane to touch the ball. When THAT occurs, then you have a T.....

Just a little game management......

OK here comes all the rules guys with why I am wrong

[bainsey]

It's probably better to ask your assigner what he thinks, than what we think here.

The only time that my assigner observed me last year, I had a DOG plane violation. I saw my assigner a week later, and he gave me a big thumbs up for calling that. If your assigner feels differently about it, just do what the boss says.

And BigT, you can sum up your advice to the defense in only a few words, "Watch the line, 44 (or applicable number)."

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

God.............. I know that I am going to get killed for supporting Rut!!!!

Big T - just a thought here ( the RULES GUYS) won't like this, but try this on for size.

A1 reaches through the plane and hits the ball, either a pass or in the inbounders hand, well he violated when he reached through the plane. You can always blow your whistle and call the violation for breaking the plane and not call an unwarranted T. You will know when player is actually attempting to reach through the plane to touch the ball. When THAT occurs, then you have a T.....

Just a little game management......

OK here comes all the rules guys with why I am wrong

You can get away with this in most lower level games. I don't bother trying, but some do and that's fine.

But I hope you realize once the thrower releases his inbound pass, the defensive restrictions are over.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You can get away with this in most lower level games. I don't bother trying, but some do and that's fine.

But I hope you realize once the thrower releases his inbound pass, the defensive restrictions are over.

So if A1 has a non-designated spot throw-in and is throwing the ball to A2 who is also OOB B2 can stick his hand across the plane and hit the ball?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

I hope you realize once the thrower releases his inbound pass, the defensive restrictions are over.

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So if A1 has a non-designated spot throw-in and is throwing the ball to A2 who is also OOB B2 can stick his hand across the plane and hit the ball?

In this case, A1 to A2 is not considered an inbounds pass.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

So if A1 has a non-designated spot throw-in and is throwing the ball to A2 who is also OOB B2 can stick his hand across the plane and hit the ball?

Originally Posted by BillyMac

In this case, A1 to A2 is not considered an inbounds pass.

What he said.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

But I hope you realize once the thrower releases his inbound pass, the defensive restrictions are over.

Not at the NCAA level.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

God.............. I know that I am going to get killed for supporting Rut!!!!

Big T - just a thought here ( the RULES GUYS) won't like this, but try this on for size.

A1 reaches through the plane and hits the ball, either a pass or in the inbounders hand, well he violated when he reached through the plane. You can always blow your whistle and call the violation for breaking the plane and not call an unwarranted T. You will know when player is actually attempting to reach through the plane to touch the ball. When THAT occurs, then you have a T.....

Just a little game management......

OK here comes all the rules guys with why I am wrong

There, I fixed it for you, and that is also why you are wrong.

The NFHS people actually took the time to write a nice case play on this so that it would be officiated consistently and correctly instructing us to penalize the entire act when the player breaks the plane AND contacts the ball in the thrower's hand(s), yet you choose to do your own personal thing.

Your line of thinking on this is strange.
Do you also not call fouls because the defender wasn't actually attempting to foul?
I can hear it now, "No, coach, that's not a foul because he was trying to hit the ball, but missed and whacked your shooter's arm. He wasn't actually trying to foul him."

[SamIAm]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There, I fixed it for you, and that is also why you are wrong.

The NFHS people actually took the time to write a nice case play on this so that it would be officiated consistently and correctly instructing us to penalize the entire act when the player breaks the plane AND contacts the ball in the thrower's hand(s), yet you choose to do your own personal thing.

Your line of thinking on this is strange.
Do you also not call fouls because the defender wasn't actually attempting to foul?
I can hear it now, "No, coach, that's not a foul because he was trying to hit the ball, but missed and whacked your shooter's arm. He wasn't actually trying to foul him."

Amen!

[fiasco]

I know some purists will jump on me for this, but I'm of the firm belief that 99% of the reach ins in these situations can be prevented by a simple "Don't reach over" aimed at the defender if I feel they're standing pretty close to the boundary line.

[APG]

Originally Posted by fiasco

I know some purists will jump on me for this, but I'm of the firm belief that 99% of the reach ins in these situations can be prevented by a simple "Don't reach over" aimed at the defender if I feel they're standing pretty close to the boundary line.

I would hope that 99 percent of people WOULDN'T have a problem with this. Good preventative approach and common sense officiating.

[tref]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I would hope that 99 percent of people WOULDN'T have a problem with this. Good preventative approach and common sense officiating.

hmmmmm

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

God.............. I know that I am going to get killed for supporting Rut!!!!

Big T - just a thought here ( the RULES GUYS) won't like this, but try this on for size.

A1 reaches through the plane and hits the ball, either a pass or in the inbounders hand, well he violated when he reached through the plane. You can always blow your whistle and call the violation for breaking the plane and not call an unwarranted T. You will know when player is actually attempting to reach through the plane to touch the ball. When THAT occurs, then you have a T.....

Just a little game management......

OK here comes all the rules guys with why I am wrong

It's not game management, it's ignoring a clearly written rule. I don't have a problem with reminding the defender to give space, but I don't like ignoring a rule just to save yourself the headache of a technical/INT foul.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

There, I fixed it for you, and that is also why you are wrong.

The NFHS people actually took the time to write a nice case play on this so that it would be officiated consistently and correctly instructing us to penalize the entire act when the player breaks the plane AND contacts the ball in the thrower's hand(s), yet you choose to do your own personal thing.

Your line of thinking on this is strange.
Do you also not call fouls because the defender wasn't actually attempting to foul?
I can hear it now, "No, coach, that's not a foul because he was trying to hit the ball, but missed and whacked your shooter's arm. He wasn't actually trying to foul him."

+100. Just call it. This is the stuff coaches complain about, and I think in this case, rightly so. One guy will call the Tech/INT foul, one guy will just issue the warning for reaching through the plane even though the thrower was touched, and one guy will ignore it all together. If everyone would just call it like it is written, we would hear less crap as a group. I think this applies to a lot of situations/rules in more than just basketball.

[Multiple Sports]

NevadaRef -

Are you allowed to change my posts.... lol !!!! B-Mac can you comment on any copyright infractions ?????

YES !!!! By rule you are correct, but at a lower level game where there is no intent lighten up my friend (those friday morning Wheaties are really kickin in). I just think that if you can get away with a violation, where it won't have a major bearing on the game then that is a good direction to go. Am I going to do it with a minute left in a tie game...YES !!!! My stones and I will step and make the technical foul call !!!!!

Peace my brothers !!!!!!

[Multiple Sports]

OK just for kicks..........

If I reach across the plane AND touch the ball, "BY RULE"...........didn't I violate first.........