The 9-step pivot

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Rich, this one is a bit much even for you to defend.

Not defending, just not surprised.

Doesn't appear anyone there actually cared, either, so why should we?

[mutantducky]

man that was funny. I think HS and college refs would have seen it but NBA really teaches to watch off-ball stuff and to know the players. KP isn't going to do anything there.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Rich

Not defending, just not surprised.

Doesn't appear anyone there actually cared, either, so why should we?

I am with Rich on this one. Yeah you could have called it, but like Rich said, no one really would have cared.

Peace

No travel, no advantage.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by AremRed

No travel, no advantage.

I might buy that for 2 or 3 steps, but this is just embarrassing to miss (and I'd bet the official responsible for this would agree).

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by AremRed

No travel, no advantage.

So, if a player steps OOB with no one on them and doesn't get anything out of it, it is not a violation either? (Violations are not advantage/disadvantage situations).

[Rich]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, if a player steps OOB with no one on them and doesn't get anything out of it, it is not a violation either? (Violations are not advantage/disadvantage situations).

Sure they are, despite all the hand-wringing. I'm sure you've seen someone with a foot on the far lane line for more than 3 seconds and haven't called it.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Rich

Sure they are, despite all the hand-wringing. I'm sure you've seen someone with a foot on the far lane line for more than 3 seconds and haven't called it.

Bad example. The 3-second rule has been clearly communicated to have a specific purpose and that isn't it.

I reiterate....OOB, how far out is tolerated and in what situations?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Violations are not advantage/disadvantage situations.

Disagree.

THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE RULES

It is important to know the intent and purpose of a rule so that it may
be intelligently applied in each play situation. A player or a team should not be
permitted an advantage which is not intended by a rule. Neither should play be
permitted to develop which may lead to placing a player at a disadvantage not
intended by a rule.

Originally Posted by Rich

Sure they are, despite all the hand-wringing. I'm sure you've seen someone with a foot on the far lane line for more than 3 seconds and haven't called it.

Agree.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

... how far out is tolerated and in what situations?

Ten seconds to shoot a free throw.

Others have pointed to inbounder with foot a half-inch over the boundary on a backcourt throwin with no defensive pressure, or a slight "carry" in the backcourt with no defensive pressure; but do not include me as a proponent of the last two.

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.

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

So, if a player steps OOB with no one on them and doesn't get anything out of it, it is not a violation either? (Violations are not advantage/disadvantage situations).

Not in the NBA.

[Rich]

About a player stepping out of bounds being a violation:

Originally Posted by AremRed

Not in the NBA.

I don't get this post. Sarcasm?

Originally Posted by Rich

About a player stepping out of bounds being a violation:



I don't get this post. Sarcasm?

Depends. Camron never specified what kind of stepping OOB the player was doing. If Camron meant to imply that the player had the ball and stepped OOB, it's obviously a violation and my comment is sarcasm. If Camron meant an off-ball player stepping OOB then that's obviously nothing and my comment can be taken literally.

And no I don't think OOB violations can be subject to advantage/disadvantage. Some violations like OOB are black and white, while some like traveling, carrying, etc. are much more gray and thus can be subject to A/D.