throw-in/goaltending

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.)