Throw Ins

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Agree, according to the case, but (B) is just dumb. It is the interpretation, but it just makes no sense. The player can legally hit or grab the ball. Contact with a player in a location and at at time where they can legally play the ball just should not be classified as an intentional foul.

This case is not actually supported by rule as the penalty which declares this as an intentional foul is attached to the rule that says the defender can not reach through the throwin plane until the ball is released. It is implying that breaking the plane is the infraction which triggers the penalty....either a violation, a TF, or an IF depending on what happens when the defender crosses the plane.

Another case of someone on the committee making things up that don't match the rule and, somehow, getting it through.

If you recall this ruling was only changed a couple of years ago. Prior to that it was just a common foul.
Mary Struckhoff was the NFHS rules editor at the time. I'd be willing to bet that either she or one of her friends working NCAAW screwed up this situation and charged an intentional personal foul, so the rule was changed to make that person retroactively correct.
I agree that it has no basis in the rules and is a poor interpretation.