Violation for Voluntarily Running Out of Bounds

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

I'm just curious, did you call it that often when it was penalized by a technical foul?

If my memory is correct, the technical foul was for egregious situations in which a player left the court to deceive the opponents. The NFHS made a statement only a few years ago about the game needing to be played within the boundaries of the playing court, which strengthened the language on this and instructed the officials to be stricter about enforcing it. It was also either just before or just after this that the penalty was changed from a T to a violation.
So, no, I did not make this call nearly as frequently when the penalty was a T, but unless my memory is incorrect, the standard for the call was also significantly different back then.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

If my memory is correct, the technical foul was for egregious situations in which a player left the court to deceive the opponents. The NFHS made a statement only a few years ago about the game needing to be played within the boundaries of the playing court, which strengthened the language on this and instructed the officials to be stricter about enforcing it. It was also either just before or just after this that the penalty was changed from a T to a violation.
So, no, I did not make this call nearly as frequently when the penalty was a T, but unless my memory is incorrect, the standard for the call was also significantly different back then.

I'll have to see if I can find my old books in the basement (no attic in this household), but I remembered the change being simply a move to rule 9 from rule 10. You may be right, though.

[JetMetFan]

Found it online. It was changed/added for the 05-06 season:

In an effort to increase the likelihood of the infraction being called to eliminate a tremendous advantage, Rule 9-3-2 was ADDED. The rule states that players leaving the court for unauthorized reasons will be charged with a violation INSTEAD of a technical foul, which was the former penalty. The rules committee felt that the rule change would not only make the action easier to enforce, but will more likely serve as a deterrent against players leaving the court.

9-3-2 The penalty for a player leaving the court for an unauthorized reason (voluntarily) or delaying his/her return to the court after a throw-in is NOW a violation.

PLAY 1: A-1 steps out of bounds to avoid a 3 second violation.

Ruling: A-1 has committed a violation. The ball shall be awarded to Team B for a throw-in at a designated spot (NOT between the free throw lane lines) nearest to where the violation was committed.

PLAY 2: Thrower-in A-1 completes the throw-in to A-2 and then takes four or five steps along the boundary line prior to coming inbounds behind a screen set by A-3 and A-4.

Ruling: A-1 has committed a violation for failing to move DIRECTLY onto the court after the release of the ball. The violation ruling is NOT to be delayed until A-1 returns to the court. It is ruled a violation WHEN the delay OCCURS.

Remaining off the court or NOT going onto the court directly is similar to leaving the court for an unauthorized reason. In THIS case it should be obvious that A-1's movement, out of bounds, along the end line was to take advantage of the screen.

NOTE: The violation DOES NOT occur when the player returns to the court and touches the ball. It occurs when the delay occurs.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Found it online. It was changed/added for the 05-06 season:

So according to this, the rule was the same before, only penalized by a technical foul. I need to go back and see if I can find the 04-05 books now. Thanks, this should help narrow down my basement search.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

So according to this, the rule was the same before, only penalized by a technical foul. I need to go back and see if I can find the 04-05 books now. Thanks, this should help narrow down my basement search.

That is correct. Only the penalty changed, not the rule.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by JetMetFan

Found it online. It was changed/added for the 05-06 season:

QUOTE: "PLAY 2: Thrower-in A-1 completes the throw-in to A-2 and then takes four or five steps along the boundary line prior to coming inbounds behind a screen set by A-3 and A-4.

Ruling: A-1 has committed a violation for failing to move DIRECTLY onto the court after the release of the ball. The violation ruling is NOT to be delayed until A-1 returns to the court. It is ruled a violation WHEN the delay OCCURS.

Remaining off the court or NOT going onto the court directly is similar to leaving the court for an unauthorized reason. In THIS case it should be obvious that A-1's movement, out of bounds, along the end line was to take advantage of the screen. "

Curiously, this Case Play is stated in Case Book 10.3.2 as penalized by a T.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

QUOTE: "PLAY 2: Thrower-in A-1 completes the throw-in to A-2 and then takes four or five steps along the boundary line prior to coming inbounds behind a screen set by A-3 and A-4.

Ruling: A-1 has committed a violation for failing to move DIRECTLY onto the court after the release of the ball. The violation ruling is NOT to be delayed until A-1 returns to the court. It is ruled a violation WHEN the delay OCCURS.

Remaining off the court or NOT going onto the court directly is similar to leaving the court for an unauthorized reason. In THIS case it should be obvious that A-1's movement, out of bounds, along the end line was to take advantage of the screen. "

Curiously, this Case Play is stated in Case Book 10.3.2 as penalized by a T.

Yep, failure to return is a T. Leaving the court is a violation. It's a bit inconsistent.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Adam

Failure to return is a T. Leaving the court is a violation. It's a bit inconsistent.

I suggested this change (below) to the NFHS, through my interpreter, this past season. I doubt that they went for it. It's too rational.

Suggested 2013-14 NFHS Rule Change

NFHS 9-3-3: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)

NFHS 10-3-2: A player shall not: Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) Two free throws plus ball for division-line throw-in.

Change 10-3-2 from a technical foul to a violation. Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds should carry the same penalty as leaving the court for an unauthorized reason.

NFHS 9-3-3-B: A player shall not purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)

[deecee]

Ive called this twice I think. I don't the intention of the rule is to penalize the player that is coming off a screen and might get half to a full shoe out of bounds. It's for the teams/players that use the OOB to gain an advantage when running off these screens.