Rules Question on strange D1 Ending (Video)

[Raymond]

Incidental contact could cause a player to step OOB. That would not be leaving the court voluntarily, nor would it be a foul.

[MechanicGuy]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Incidental contact could cause a player to step OOB. That would not be leaving the court voluntarily, nor would it be a foul.

This.

Don't agree at all with the idea that if there's no foul he went out voluntarily.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by MechanicGuy

This.

Don't agree at all with the idea that if there's no foul he went out voluntarily.

Got a ruling to back your opinion?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Got a ruling to back your opinion?

The rule says "voluntarily". It doesn't say "if there is no foul".

[Coach Bill]

Many offensive players get bumped while trying to rub off screens. Most of the time, the official passes on that contact (i.e., no foul). But, now if the contact moves him a tiny bit and the offensive steps on the line it's a foul, or if he is the first to touch, it's a violation. I guarantee the good officials are going to deem this non-voluntary, and play on.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

Many offensive players get bumped while trying to rub off screens. Most of the time, the official passes on that contact (i.e., no foul). But, now if the contact moves him a tiny bit and the offensive steps on the line it's a foul, or if he is the first to touch, it's a violation. I guarantee the good officials are going to deem this non-voluntary, and play on.

I can see it both ways -- if a player doesn't have room to slip by a screener without stepping out of bounds even if they brush...it's voluntary.

[Coach Bill]

Originally Posted by Rich

I can see it both ways -- if a player doesn't have room to slip by a screener without stepping out of bounds even if they brush...it's voluntary.

I agree with that.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rich

I can see it both ways -- if a player doesn't have room to slip by a screener without stepping out of bounds even if they brush...it's voluntary.

An offensive player and defensive player could bump into each other and it be incidental. The offensive player could step OOB as a result. I'm not calling a violation on that.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Incidental contact could cause a player to step OOB. That would not be leaving the court voluntarily, nor would it be a foul.

I don't agree. Either the contact is a foul or the player leaving the court is at risk of being penalized with a violation (if first to touch in NCAA).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I don't agree. Either the contact is a foul or the player leaving the court is at risk of being penalized with a violation (if first to touch in NCAA).

A1 and B1 run parallel down the sideline. They both look back in anticipation of an outlet pass. There is contact. (if this contact had happened in the center of the court nobody would have thought twice about it) As the contact occurs, A1 steps on the line. The outlet pass comes and A1 makes a leaping catch. You would call this a violation?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by just another ref

A1 and B1 run parallel down the sideline. They both look back in anticipation of an outlet pass. There is contact. (if this contact had happened in the center of the court nobody would have thought twice about it) As the contact occurs, A1 steps on the line. The outlet pass comes and A1 makes a leaping catch. You would call this a violation?

Yes, and the way you've written this OOB violation may be the proper call.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

Yes, and the way you've written this OOB violation may be the proper call.

So what would it take to be not "of his own volition" for you?

A1 slips on a wet spot and falls to the floor. In doing so, his foot touches the sideline. He jumps to his feet (inbounds) catches the ball and shoots.

Is this a violation?

[letemplay]

Was going to start a new thread on this question but it seems closely relevant (rule wise anyways) Saw this play run a few times in a game Sat and opposing coach wanting a T: Baseline OOB throw under A's basket, after A1 makes the throw in, he remains OOB at that spot for several seconds as the ball is passed among his teammates, then he runs to corner to receive a pass, I suppose hoping the defense loses track. Any violation for NOT returning inbounds soon after throw?

EDIT: Sorry, I see I should have read another thread for a more similar play and question.

[Pantherdreams]

What if contact is caused by a teammate? Two crossing teammates bump one steps on endline/past gatherhing balance?

What if contact is not a foul. Defensive player holding position in the middle of the key entitled to their post and offensive player not paying attention runs into the defender and bounces off and steps on baseline as a result?

[crosscountry55]

Originally Posted by letemplay

Was going to start a new thread on this question but it seems closely relevant (rule wise anyways) Saw this play run a few times in a game Sat and opposing coach wanting a T: Baseline OOB throw under A's basket, after A1 makes the throw in, he remains OOB at that spot for several seconds as the ball is passed among his teammates, then he runs to corner to receive a pass, I suppose hoping the defense loses track. Any violation for NOT returning inbounds soon after throw?

Coach may have had a point. I don't have my book in front of me, but when a thrower purposely delays returning inbounds in order to deceive, it's a Technical Foul on the player.

Conversely, when a thrower is not involved and you have players going OOB for unauthorized reasons, it's a violation.

Interestingly for the sake of NFHS trivia and/or future exam questions, this along with the excessively swinging elbows violation are the two violations (when committed by opponents of the shooter) that do not cause the ball to become dead when a try is in flight. Usually it's a foul that activates this exception, but there are two violations that do as well.