Team control, throw-in, IW

[rbruno]

I believe we still have a violation because by hitting even the bottom of the backboard , which is inbounds...it did not go 'directly" onto the court.

[asdf]

Originally Posted by rbruno

I believe we still have a violation because by hitting even the bottom of the backboard , which is inbounds...it did not go 'directly" onto the court.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by rbruno

I believe we still have a violation because by hitting even the bottom of the backboard , which is inbounds...it did not go 'directly" onto the court.

BNR's scenario includes the ball having been thrown "directly onto the court" (it mentions that the ball was deflected by B), thus, no violation.
It seems to me, that there are two choices . . . POI may be considered the throw-in by A, and thus we re-do the throw-in,
or, we treat the scenario as the throw-in having been completed, (when the ball was touched by B) but with no team control having been established on the court, we may go to an AP throw-in.
Presently, I favor the latter. But I'm willing to consider other opinions.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

When does the arrow switch? 6-4-4 and 4-42-5



I'm not sure I agree. Do you have a reference? (It's a convenient "shortcut" to remembering the most usual situations, but I don't think it's universal.)

This part is correct. Same references as above, plus 6-4-5

From our state director of officiating, thru the NFHS. We have been told this is the interpretation of the NFHS as well.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

BNR's scenario includes the ball having been thrown "directly onto the court" (it mentions that the ball was deflected by B), thus, no violation.
It seems to me, that there are two choices . . . POI may be considered the throw-in by A, and thus we re-do the throw-in,
or, we treat the scenario as the throw-in having been completed, (when the ball was touched by B) but with no team control having been established on the court, we may go to an AP throw-in.
Presently, I favor the latter. But I'm willing to consider other opinions.

If it hits the bottom of the backboard and we have an IW, it goes back to the AP throw in. The throw in has not been completed, and this isn't a violation. The arrow will change when the throw in has ended.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by OKREF

If it hits the bottom of the backboard and we have an IW, it goes back to the AP throw in. The throw in has not been completed, and this isn't a violation. The arrow will change when the throw in has ended.

I agree, if the ball went directly from thrower-in A to the bottom of the backboard, but the scenario posed by BNR has the ball being deflected by B, and then hitting the bottom of the backboard. I understand that the throw-in ended when the ball was "deflected by B."

[APG]

Originally Posted by rbruno

i believe we still have a violation because by hitting even the bottom of the backboard , which is inbounds...it did not go 'directly" onto the court.

7.1.2 Situation A

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

I agree, if the ball went directly from thrower-in A to the bottom of the backboard, but the scenario posed by BNR has the ball being deflected by B, and then hitting the bottom of the backboard. I understand that the throw-in ended when the ball was "deflected by B."

I didn't catch his scenario. If the throw in ended, which it does when it is legally touched by B, the arrow changes then, and there is an IW and no team control exists then you go to the AP, which would be team B ball.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

When does the arrow switch? 6-4-4 and 4-42-5



I'm not sure I agree. Do you have a reference? (It's a convenient "shortcut" to remembering the most usual situations, but I don't think it's universal.)

This part is correct. Same references as above, plus 6-4-5

Got this from the 2011-12 Rulebook.

2011-12 Rules changes
Several definitions were changed to reflect that team control now exists during a throw-in when the thrower-in has the ball at his/her disposal. The change primarily affects how foul penalties will be administered.

Not saying you're wrong, and I do understand what you're saying. Just know how we have been instructed to apply the rule.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by OKREF

Got this from the 2011-12 Rulebook.

2011-12 Rules changes
Several definitions were changed to reflect that team control now exists during a throw-in when the thrower-in has the ball at his/her disposal. The change primarily affects how foul penalties will be administered.

Not saying you're wrong, and I do understand what you're saying. Just know how we have been instructed to apply the rule.

"Primarily" <> "only".

My guess is that the play(s) in this thread were not considered when someone decided to give additional guidance. Stil, "when in Rome..."

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Question:

AP throw-in; B2 deflects throw-in; ball hits bottom of backboard; inadvertent whistle.

How do we handle this situation?

AP throw-in has ended, so AP arrow changes immediately. But do we still have TC by A, or does TC not apply to throw-in outside of fouls?

My take: The AP throwin has ended, but TC has not. Give the ball back to A, but the arrow is now with B so if there's a foul before the next throw-in ends, B still has the arrow.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

"Primarily" <> "only".

My guess is that the play(s) in this thread were not considered when someone decided to give additional guidance. Stil, "when in Rome..."

I agree with this. They wanted to address fouls and created more confusion by doing so.

[OKREF]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

My take: The AP throwin has ended, but TC has not. Give the ball back to A, but the arrow is now with B so if there's a foul before the next throw-in ends, B still has the arrow.

I can see this point. Maybe I'm wrong. Will have to find out what our rules interpreter says.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

My take: The AP throwin has ended, but TC has not. Give the ball back to A, but the arrow is now with B so if there's a foul before the next throw-in ends, B still has the arrow.

So, the issue is whether the TC in regards to the throw-in ends with the end of the throw-in, or if it persists until TC is established on the floor, whether by the throw-in team or the opponent?
If I'm understanding this correctly, if TC by the throw-in team ends when the throw-in ends, (that is, when the deflection by B occurs) and the deflection doesn't constitute TC by the opponent, then an AP should follow the IW. And, if TC for the throw-in persists until either team establishes TC on the floor, the IW would result in a throw-in for the original throw-in team.

[Zoochy]

Originally Posted by zm1283

On this note, I was working a scrimmage last Friday night. I was the Lead and administering the throw-in in the frontcourt on the endline. The thrower went to throw the ball to a teammate and it hit the bottom (From what I could tell) of the backboard and came down in bounds on the court, where one of the players on the court grabbed it. I wasn't going call a violation because it looked like it came straight down, leading me to believe that it hit the bottom of the backboard and not the back. It also landed in bounds. My partner comes in after a brief delay and says that it was a violation. At the next break I asked him about it and he said that when it hit, it angled back toward the endline so it must have hit the back of the backboard. I told him that it landed in bounds and from my angle it went straight down so I would have left it alone. We agreed to disagree and went on.

I remember people talking about this on here before. If it doesn't come straight down after hitting the backboard do you guys always assume it hit the back?

Were you working w/Ed HighTower?