DoG on Inbound throw-in

[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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

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.

Honestly you cannot speak for everyone here, but I have not seen a player at the high school level even get close to a technical or intentional foul on a throw-in. The times when I have had to actually call this were a middle school and below and that was early in my career.

Peace

[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.........

[tref]

Although I agree with calling this as it is written (at the varsity level & up) the following is BS!

Originally Posted by zm1283

This is the stuff coaches complain about, and I think in this case, rightly so.


If everyone would just call it like it is written, we would hear less crap as a group.

I highly doubt it, for the majority, they want it called consistently... in their favor that is.

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

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

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

I believe theres a caseplay to support calling the T/INT over the initial violation.
I'm quite sure a good official like yourself knows how to talk em out of silly infractions though

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

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

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

I swing my elbow and clock you in the face. Didn't I violate first?

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Honestly you cannot speak for everyone here, but I have not seen a player at the high school level even get close to a technical or intentional foul on a throw-in. The times when I have had to actually call this were a middle school and below and that was early in my career.

Peace

I think I have given two technicals for slapping the ball while the thrower had it in his hands. Both were obvious and couldn't and shouldn't have been ignored.

Apparently you have not seen how bad some of the basketball is in places far from you.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I think I have given two technicals for slapping the ball while the thrower had it in his hands. Both were obvious and couldn't and shouldn't have been ignored.

Apparently you have not seen how bad some of the basketball is in places far from you.

In high school games?

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I think I have given two technicals for slapping the ball while the thrower had it in his hands. Both were obvious and couldn't and shouldn't have been ignored.

Apparently you have not seen how bad some of the basketball is in places far from you.

There is bad basketball everywhere and I see a lot of it during every season. A lot of very bad coached teams I will see every season as well.

But you said that this was ignored as if that it was only not being called because people decided not to call this violation of the rules. I just do not work a lot of basketball where this is even an issue. And I think it is more the case because older players know better, than how well coached they are.

Peace

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I swing my elbow and clock you in the face. Didn't I violate first?

Not a valid comparison.

It is still a foul, a technical foul specifically, to clock someone in the face with an elbow even during a dead ball.

However, there is nothing illegal about contacting a ball that is dead.

That, of course, is not to say that the case play on this topic is wrong.....just that your example doesn't work.