Inbounds Violation (Video)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Are you saying that three seconds, which is a violation, is never a game interrupter?

... or ten seconds to release a free throw (change "game interrupter" (not my favorite phrase) above to "interpreted based on advantage/disadvantage").

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... or ten seconds to release a free throw (change "game interrupter" (not my favorite phrase) above to "interpreted based on advantage/disadvantage").

Ok, so now the advantage/disadvantage philosophy applies to not only three second violations, but also 10 seconds on a FT, too. Where do we draw the line?

I think a throw-in after a made basket when an inch or two of the thrower's foot is over the line and no defender is anywhere even close to the play belongs in this same advantage/disadvantage grouping.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Ok, so now the advantage/disadvantage philosophy applies to not only three second violations, but also 10 seconds on a FT, too. Where do we draw the line?.

That's where I, and all of my local colleagues, draw it.

In the immortal words of the infamous Jurassic Referee: "There are certain violations that I think that even the FED rulesmakers would probably agree, if you twisted their arms, that some discretion (read: advantage/disadvantage) is needed to make an appropriate call. Examples might be 3-seconds and the 10-second count on a free-throw shooter".

(Before he passed away, I got Jurassic Referee to agree that these were two violations to apply advantage/disadvantage to. It was, in my opinion, my finest hour on the Forum.)

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

I think a throw-in after a made basket when an inch or two of the thrower's foot is over the line and no defender is anywhere even close to the play belongs in this same advantage/disadvantage grouping.

Not according to a casebook play.

9.2.5 SITUATION A: Thrower A1 inadvertently steps onto the court inbounds. A1
immediately steps back into normal out-of-bounds throw-in position. The contact
with the court was during a situation: (a) with; or (b) without defensive pressure on
the throw-in team. RULING: A violation in both (a) and (b). COMMENT: Whether or
not there was defensive pressure or whether or not stepping on the court was inadvertent,
it is a violation and no judgment is required in making the call.

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Not according to a casebook play.

9.2.5 SITUATION A: Thrower A1 inadvertently steps onto the court inbounds. A1
immediately steps back into normal out-of-bounds throw-in position. The contact
with the court was during a situation: (a) with; or (b) without defensive pressure on
the throw-in team. RULING: A violation in both (a) and (b). COMMENT: Whether or
not there was defensive pressure or whether or not stepping on the court was inadvertent,
it is a violation and no judgment is required in making the call.

Very astute of you. I thought of that "no judgment is required" case play. But this is about a thrower who gets fully OOB and then steps in. The case that I'm referring to (and I'm sure many of us see it frequently) is when the thrower never technically gets OOB, i.e. he gathers the made shot, steps toward the endline, pivots while lifting the other foot, and you notice that pivot foot was an inch or two over the line.

I admit this is technically a violation based on the rules interp we discussed in another thread recently when a team starts advancing the ball without having taken it OOB. But when the team has every intention of taking it out properly and there's no disadvantage incurred by an absent defense....I just can't see that as anything other than a game interrupter. So we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Very astute of you.

Is "astute" Latin for "stupid"? Should I be offended?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

Where do we draw the line?

Knowledge. Experience. Practice. Judgment. Intelligence.

"It is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may
be intelligently applied in each play situation."

Sometimes lines are drawn in sand, and not chiseled in stone.