throw-in/goaltending

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

While I agree this is technically basket interference I suggest we use some common sense here.

Pretty clear cut BI...no reason to not call it. Common sense, that isn't so common, such that is in direct contradiction to a clear rule, just because you don't like it, is a bad reason to not call an obvious infraction.

Without it, you could have a throwin from the side, pass over the rim, coming down towards the other side (or even into the basket) such that a teammate of the thrower could go up and slam it in (or even just touch it so it wasn't the throwin that was going directly in). That is the play they want to prohibit.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Without it, you could have a throwin from the side, pass over the rim, coming down towards the other side (or even into the basket) such that a teammate of the thrower could go up and slam it in (or even just touch it so it wasn't the throwin that was going directly in). That is the play they want to prohibit.

MTD, Camron has provided the answer to the question that I couldn't quite get the wording for. I wanted to know the basis of why the act needs to be penalized, as I couldn't think of a scenario where a team has an advantage, such that a violation needed to be in the book. Even though I don't think this scenario really gives the offense that much of an advantage, it's sort of what I was looking for.

There are other violations in the book that I don't agree with, but I will follow the rules as is the case with this scenario. For example, and another throw in situation, if the thrown ball lodges between the backboard and the rim, it's a violation. I've seen this a number of times and called it accordingly, even though I personally don't think it should be a violation, after all it's not like the kid did anything on purpose, or gave himself or his team an advantage. But the bottom line is this: Even when I do disagree with a rule or penalty, that DOES NOT prevent me from applying the rule as written. During a game, my opinion about how a rule is worded is completely irrelevant.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by frezer11

There are other violations in the book that I don't agree with, but I will follow the rules as is the case with this scenario. For example, and another throw in situation, if the thrown ball lodges between the backboard and the rim, it's a violation. I've seen this a number of times and called it accordingly, even though I personally don't think it should be a violation, after all it's not like the kid did anything on purpose, or gave himself or his team an advantage. But the bottom line is this: Even when I do disagree with a rule or penalty, that DOES NOT prevent me from applying the rule as written. During a game, my opinion about how a rule is worded is completely irrelevant.

This actually makes perfect sense once you look at context. It just has nothing to do with whether the shooter did something "wrong." 90% of FTs are rebounded by the defense. This rule simply gives the ball to the defense (who was by far most likley to have it) instead of giving the shoooter who missed the shot a 50% chance of getting it back by going to the arrow.

[frezer11]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

This actually makes perfect sense once you look at context. It just has nothing to do with whether the shooter did something "wrong." 90% of FTs are rebounded by the defense. This rule simply gives the ball to the defense (who was by far most likley to have it) instead of giving the shoooter who missed the shot a 50% chance of getting it back by going to the arrow.

I was actually referring to a throw in, not a free throw.

[so cal lurker]

Originally Posted by frezer11

I was actually referring to a throw in, not a free throw.

I've never seen that happen on a TI, which is probably why I assumed you were writing about a FT. I guess I'm ambivalent about this one. (In the old days, I think it would have been a 5 second violation, as the rule used to require it to be touched in bounds within 5 seconds . . . .)

[Adam]

Originally Posted by so cal lurker

I've never seen that happen on a TI, which is probably why I assumed you were writing about a FT. I guess I'm ambivalent about this one. (In the old days, I think it would have been a 5 second violation, as the rule used to require it to be touched in bounds within 5 seconds . . . .)

I don't think it's a problem. The thrower is required to throw it so that it touches a player on the court. If he throws it and it gets lodged in the rim, he has failed to meet that requirement just the same as if he threw it out of bounds.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Pretty clear cut BI...no reason to not call it. Common sense, that isn't so common, such that is in direct contradiction to a clear rule, just because you don't like it, is a bad reason to not call an obvious infraction.

You're right, I shouldn't no-call something just because the result is not palpable to me.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AremRed

You're right, I shouldn't no-call something just because the result is not palpable to me.

A lot of us old timers had problems when the NFHS made excessive arm swinging (with no contact) a technical foul. It was a hard pill to swallow. Few of us called it unless it was really, really excessive. Now that it's back to a violation, we call it all the time (when it happens).

There. I admit it. There's some type of statute of limitations on this? Right? I don't need the Fashion Police knocking on my door with an arrest warrant.

Now, can we work on this one that I find not very palpable in its present form?

NFHS 9-3-3: A player shall not leave the court for an unauthorized reason.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)

NFHS 10-3-2: A player shall not: Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) Two free throws plus ball for division-line throw-in.

Change 10-3-2 from a technical foul to a violation. Purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds should carry the same penalty as leaving the court for an unauthorized reason.

And, voilà:

NFHS 9-3-3-B: A player shall not purposely and/or deceitfully delay returning after legally being out of bounds.
PENALTY: (Section 3) The ball is dead when the violation occurs and is awarded to the opponents for a throw-in from the designated out-of-bounds spot nearest the violation. (See 6-7-9 Exception d)