throw-in/goaltending

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Basket Interference (BI) and Goaltending (GT) are violations that involve the Ball. I will discuss BI first, then GT (not involving FTs), and then GT involving FTs.


BI applies to a Live Ball that is:

a) IN,

b) ON the Basket, or

c) IN or TOUCHING the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring.

The BI Rule does not care how or what caused the Ball to be in (a), (b), or (c). The BI Rule only cares about the Ball being touched while it is in (a), (b), or (c).


GT also applies to a Live Ball, but to a Live Ball during a FGA (including a Tap) that is:

a) on its way downward flight,

b) entirely above the Basket Ring,

c) has a chance the possibility of the Basket in flight.


A special note to Frezer11, as you can see there really is a difference between BI and GT and why they are different.


(With apologies to Monty Python.) And now for something completely different. GT of a FT is an completely different situation. And the Rule goes back to the early 1980's when the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees changed the FT to allow players in Spaces along the FT Lane to enter the FT Lane after the Ball was released by the FT Shooter during his/her FT Attempt.

The Rules Committees soon realized that a very quick Defender could enter the FT Lane after the Shooter and released the Ball and block the FT Attempt before it had started its downward flight.

The Rules Committees revised the definition of GT to include a Defender (not a teammate of the FT Shooter) touching the Ball after the FT Shooter had released the Ball and before the Ball entered the Imaginary Cyinder above the Basket Ring, as well made it a TF charged to the Defender that committed the GT.

The NFHS Rules Committee never changed the definition of GT when it reverted back to the old rule that prevented the players in the Spaces along the FT Lane from entering the FT Lane until the Ball had touched the Backboard or Basket. And now that Players in the Spaces along the FT Lane can enter the FT Lane after the Ball is released by the FT Shooter, the GT of a FT Rule has some relevance.

MTD, Sr.

I thank you for posting this, and I don't want to sound unappreciative or arrogant, but I really think I do have a pretty solid understanding of those differences. My question is not the interpretation of the rule, but rather why the rule exists the way that it does. I get why basket interference exists on a pass, but why is BI possible when a field goal is not? Is there a reason the rule includes a throw in rather than excluding that scenario?

[mutantducky]

? I guess simply because you can't make a basket from a throw-in. So it has to be BI and not goaltending

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Basket Interference (BI) and Goaltending (GT) are violations that involve the Ball. I will discuss BI first, then GT (not involving FTs), and then GT involving FTs.


BI applies to a Live Ball that is:

a) IN,

b) ON the Basket, or

c) IN or TOUCHING the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring.

The BI Rule does not care how or what caused the Ball to be in (a), (b), or (c). The BI Rule only cares about the Ball being touched while it is in (a), (b), or (c).


GT also applies to a Live Ball, but to a Live Ball during a FGA (including a Tap) that is:

a) on its way downward flight,

b) entirely above the Basket Ring,

c) has a chance the possibility of the Basket in flight.


A special note to Frezer11, as you can see there really is a difference between BI and GT and why they are different.


(With apologies to Monty Python.) And now for something completely different. GT of a FT is an completely different situation. And the Rule goes back to the early 1980's when the NFHS and NCAA Rules Committees changed the FT to allow players in Spaces along the FT Lane to enter the FT Lane after the Ball was released by the FT Shooter during his/her FT Attempt.

The Rules Committees soon realized that a very quick Defender could enter the FT Lane after the Shooter and released the Ball and block the FT Attempt before it had started its downward flight.

The Rules Committees revised the definition of GT to include a Defender (not a teammate of the FT Shooter) touching the Ball after the FT Shooter had released the Ball and before the Ball entered the Imaginary Cyinder above the Basket Ring, as well made it a TF charged to the Defender that committed the GT.

The NFHS Rules Committee never changed the definition of GT when it reverted back to the old rule that prevented the players in the Spaces along the FT Lane from entering the FT Lane until the Ball had touched the Backboard or Basket. And now that Players in the Spaces along the FT Lane can enter the FT Lane after the Ball is released by the FT Shooter, the GT of a FT Rule has some relevance.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by frezer11

I thank you for posting this, and I don't want to sound unappreciative or arrogant, but I really think I do have a pretty solid understanding of those differences. My question is not the interpretation of the rule, but rather why the rule exists the way that it does. I get why basket interference exists on a pass, but why is BI possible when a field goal is not? Is there a reason the rule includes a throw in rather than excluding that scenario?

frezer11:

Without discussing GT of FTA:

NFHS R1-S10-A1 defines the Basket. By adding the Imaginary Cylinder to R1-S1-A1 we now have the basis for BI. As I have stated before, the BI Rule does NOT care how or what caused a Live Ball to be in or touching the Basket Ring, or touching the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring.

GT applies the a Live Ball is outside the Imaginary Cylinder above the Basket Ring during a FTA subject to the criteria I listed in my recent post.


The definitions of BI and GT are quite specific. I don't understand you question.

MTD, Sr.

Originally Posted by frezer11

I get why basket interference exists on a pass, but why is BI possible when a field goal is not?

Exactly. Chalk one up to FIBA rules for having some common sense I guess.

[mutantducky]

this may be a bit hard to see. But for NFHS would you call BI here?
http://scores.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=400578852

15 second mark, Suns player hits the net. Mike Conley spots it. Also looks like the refs had different calls at the 55 mark, the And 1 play by Marc Gasol. Unless the commentary is wrong.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by mutantducky

NFHS would you call BI here? Suns player hits the net.

Tough call. The ball may have been bouncing above the ring when the net was touched, and if so, no basket interference.

[La Rikardo]

A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. Before the throw-in ends, B1 commits basket interference at A's basket.

This is no different from B kicking the ball before the end of the throw-in, right? A is awarded two points, keeps the arrow, and B will have a BCELTI.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. Before the throw-in ends, B1 commits basket interference at A's basket.
This is no different from B kicking the ball before the end of the throw-in, right?

Great question. I don't have a citation here, but I can guess that since the throwin didn't end with an legal touch, it must like a kicked ball, so the throwin really hasn't ended. A keeps the arrow.

I can't wait until I get home from work to see if I was correct.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by La Rikardo

A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. Before the throw-in ends, B1 commits basket interference at A's basket.

This is no different from B kicking the ball before the end of the throw-in, right? A is awarded two points, keeps the arrow, and B will have a BCELTI.

No, this is the same as B1 catching the throw-in pass with a foot on a boundary line. The touch is legal and the player violates some other rule (out of bounds or BI), but not the prohibition on kicking or punching the ball with a closed fist.

Award two points and reverse the arrow as the throw-in ends with the touch that causes BI.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

No, this is the same as B1 catching the throw-in pass with a foot on a boundary line. The touch is legal and the player violates some other rule (out of bounds or BI), but not the prohibition on kicking or punching the ball with a closed fist.

Award two points and reverse the arrow as the throw-in ends with the touch that causes BI.

This is key. And I think this is what would likely get missed and screwed up if this were to happen.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

No, this is the same as B1 catching the throw-in pass with a foot on a boundary line. The touch is legal and the player violates some other rule (out of bounds or BI), but not the prohibition on kicking or punching the ball with a closed fist.

Sounds good (especially the example of the out of bounds call, combined with your statement "The touch is legal and the player violates some other rule"). So the only illegal touches on a throwin are a kicked ball, and a punched ball? I believe you, but do you have a citation?

(We've had similar discussions on an illegal touch (catch) by one of the jumpers during a jump ball, and whether, or not, to reset the clock to zero if it started in error.)