Rules Question on strange D1 Ending (Video)

[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.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Coach Bill

I agree with that.

I'd like to see a look down the end line. Without that, I really can't do much other than trust the judgement of the D1 official that's standing right there looking at it.

[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.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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.

I don't necessarily disagree with that. But like I said above, if the defensive player doesn't give enough room to get by...I could see contact and still expect it to be a violation.

[bainsey]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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.

Right. I've only had this violation in one game this season, and I had it twice (very rare), once for each team. In both cases, an offensive player made more than a few steps over the endline, trying to pass his defender.

My partner for that game had one of those teams later in the season, and the same kid did the same thing!

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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.

Either the contact inhibits the normal movements of an opponent and constitutes a foul or the player went to that location of his own volition and thus is subject to the violation rule. What you are doing is either ignoring a foul or ignoring a potential violation.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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.

Nor am I.

I have to see the player clearly and deliberately take a path OOB before i call that violation.

And I don't think they really even intended for this to be a violation if the player merely steps on the line but could have easily not.