Throw In

[bballref3966]

Originally Posted by Triad zebra

No of those 3 things has happened in the OP

The back of the backboard is out of bounds by rule. The throw-in touched this object that is out of bounds and therefore it is a violation. Whether or not it is a "run the endline" throw-in or whether the ball comes back to the player is irrelevant—it's a violation. I'm not sure how that case play has nothing to do with the OP. Plus you said that you are allowed to throw the ball off the wall on a throw-in and obviously that's not true.

I think there is a difference between throwing the ball off the back wall and catching it and then throwing it into the court, and throwing the ball off the back wall and letting it bounce into the court without touching it again.

[Triad zebra]

Originally Posted by bballref3966

The back of the backboard is out of bounds by rule. The throw-in touched this object that is out of bounds and therefore it is a violation. Whether or not it is a "run the endline" throw-in or whether the ball comes back to the player is irrelevant—it's a violation. I'm not sure how that case play has nothing to do with the OP. Plus you said that you are allowed to throw the ball off the wall on a throw-in and obviously that's not true.

The case play references the ball touching out of bounds and then going into the court. My situations are bouncing the ball, off the backboard, floor or back wall and having the ball come straight back to A1. A1 can 100% without a doubt "dribble" the ball while standing out of bounds. So the question is what makes it illegal to throw it against the back of the backboard and have it rebound back to A1 while still out of bounds?

[Adam]

On an end line throw in, we have to determine the intent of the throw. 99% of the time, or more, the intent is obvious. This is one of those times. The intent was to throw the ball onto the court, thus making it a throw in pass. Once that throw in pass touches OOB before touching a player, it is a violation for having a TI pass go OOB before touching a player.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Adam

On an end line throw in, we have to determine the intent of the throw. 99% of the time, or more, the intent is obvious. This is one of those times. The intent was to throw the ball onto the court, thus making it a throw in pass. Once that throw in pass touches OOB before touching a player, it is a violation for having a TI pass go OOB before touching a player.

This is the correct understanding and reasoning.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Adam

On an end line throw in, we have to determine the intent of the throw. 99% of the time, or more, the intent is obvious. This is one of those times. The intent was to throw the ball onto the court, thus making it a throw in pass. Once that throw in pass touches OOB before touching a player, it is a violation for having a TI pass go OOB before touching a player.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

This is the correct understanding and reasoning.

Agree...but some say you can't go by intent but have to go by what actually happens. If that were the case, they never intended to throw it in if it returns to them.

[Nevadaref]

Please note that the front face of the backboard is four feet from the endline on a standard court, so this player threw the ball nearly four feet forward (actually a greater distance when the upward angle is factored in). That most certainly qualifies as a throw-in pass.
Fwiw, I agree that a player may bounce the ball on a rear wall without penalty if it is obvious that there is no intent for this to be the throw-in pass and the ball does not carom into the playing court.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by bballref3966

2013-14 Case Book 9.2.2 Situation A: Thrower A1: causes the ball to carom from the floor out of bounds and then into the court; RULING: Violation in since the throw touched an object out of bounds.

So an inbounder can't make a "bounce pass" throwin, even if he's ten feet back from the boundary, and the ball bounces once out of bounds (within the designated spot), and then is caught by a player inbounds? I'm not sure that I'm calling that a violation in my game.

[LRZ]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Fwiw, I agree that a player may bounce the ball on a rear wall without penalty if it is obvious that there is no intent for this to be the throw-in pass and the ball does not carom into the playing court.

It's not unusual, I think, for a player to grab the ball, step OOB and throw the ball against the back wall in frustration. I never even considered that a violation. "Intent" just seems superfluous, reading a term into a rule that isn't there. Some rules talk about intent, others don't, so why import it?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Agree...but some say you can't go by intent ...

Some just know that determining intent is called judgment.

[Triad zebra]

The intent in the OP is a throw in that came back to A1. On the very next trip down the floor B1 INTENTIONALLY bounces ball off the back board and the ball rebounds directly to him. Someone's got a lot of explaining to do if you call one a violation and the other nothing.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Some just know that determining intent is called judgment.

And judgement is worthless if you don't know the underlying rules applicable to the action being judged.

[LRZ]

Originally Posted by Adam

On an end line throw in, we have to determine the intent of the throw. 99% of the time, or more, the intent is obvious. This is one of those times. The intent was to throw the ball onto the court, thus making it a throw in pass. Once that throw in pass touches OOB before touching a player, it is a violation for having a TI pass go OOB before touching a player.

I don't see why we would judge intent, even in 1% of the cases. We place the ball at the disposal of the thrower, suggesting the player's role at that point. But what else is he to do with the ball? Why else would the player release the ball except to inbound it? Setting aside the issue of intent, which I'd consider irrelevant here, I agree with the second part of this analysis: the ball touched OOB before being touched by another player.

[bballref3966]

Why is there even a discussion about intent? The rule and case books pretty blatantly support that throwing the ball off an object out of bounds before it touches an inbounds player (not including dribbling on the floor) is a violation—there's no basis in the rule for judging intent. If it happens, it's a violation. Am I oversimplifying this?