Delay Of Game ...

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Freddy

Then it's the same as the defender reaching across to touch the ball while still in the in-bounder's hands -- a team technical.

Team technical? I believe it's a player technical, but I can be convinced otherwise.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Team technical? I believe it's a player technical, but I can be convinced otherwise.

You are correct, this would be a player T (as opposed to the team T that gets assessed if he happens to be the second player to break the throw in plane).

[Freddy]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Team technical? I believe it's a player technical, but I can be convinced otherwise.

You're correct. Thank you for calling me out on my error. -- 9.2.10A.
Though violating the boundary plane by the defender after a warning had been previously issued (without contacting the ball) IS a team technical -- 10-1-5c.
Repeated violation of this is (even without contacting the ball) merits a player technical -- 10-3-5d.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Freddy

You're correct. Thank you for calling me out on my error. -- 9.2.10A.
Though violating the boundary plane by the defender after a warning had been previously issued (without contacting the ball) IS a team technical -- 10-1-5c.
Repeated violation of this is (even without contacting the ball) merits a player technical -- 10-3-5d.

So let me make sure I get this straight. Team A throwin in all situations.
B1 reaches across the plane and is called for DOG warning. Later B1reaches through the plane and team B is assessed a team TF. Later still B1 reaches through the plane and is assessed a player TF.

Next scenario. Team A throwin. B1 reaches through plane and receives DOG warning. Later B2 reaches through the plane and a team TF is assessed. Later still B3 reaches through the plane and B3 is assessed a Personal TF.

Is that right?

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So let me make sure I get this straight. Team A throwin in all situations.
B1 reaches across the plane and is called for DOG warning. Later B1reaches through the plane and team B is assessed a team TF. Later still B1 reaches through the plane and is assessed a player TF.

Next scenario. Team A throwin. B1 reaches through plane and receives DOG warning. Later B2 reaches through the plane and a team TF is assessed. Later still B3 reaches through the plane and B3 is assessed a Personal TF.

Is that right?

No.

The repeated part is not about different points of the game...it is a about continuing to do so time after time.

[Sharpshooternes]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

No.

The repeated part is not about different points of the game...it is a about continuing to do so time after time.

So right in a row, not with other legal throwing in between? So in theory you could have multiple team techs for plane violations throughout the game and no player techs?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So right in a row, not with other legal throwing in between? So in theory you could have multiple team techs for plane violations throughout the game and no player techs?

Since the warning, and then the technical fouls, are charged, and recorded, by the official scorekeeper, to the team, not to individual players, I would have no idea, and the official scorekeeper would have no record, of which individual players were involved in previous violations, especially if some of the violations were called by my partner.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Sharpshooternes

So let me make sure I get this straight. Team A throwin in all situations.
B1 reaches across the plane and is called for DOG warning. Later B1reaches through the plane and team B is assessed a team TF. Later still B1 reaches through the plane and is assessed a player TF.

Next scenario. Team A throwin. B1 reaches through plane and receives DOG warning. Later B2 reaches through the plane and a team TF is assessed. Later still B3 reaches through the plane and B3 is assessed a Personal TF.

Is that right?

What's that?

You're only going to get a 10-3-5 T if someone is either just clueless or trying to make a mockery of the game or drawing attention to himself, etc.

[DrPete]

I like it when you guys quote rules to go along with your responses. I just learned a detail that the defender can reach over the boundary plane after the ball is released by the thrower. I never picked up on that nuance of the rule until I read it again along with this discussion.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by DrPete

I like it when you guys quote rules to go along with your responses.

It's getting harder and harder to do so since the NFHS has made internet copies of it's rulebooks, and casebooks, with the ability to copy, and paste, sections, unavailable, even to members.

I'm presently copying, and pasting, sections from a 2011-12 rulebook, and a 2011-12 casebook, and I'm not sure how much longer these old pdf books will be relevant.

Typing from the paper books? Fuhgeddaboudit.