Arkansas High School Football > Official's Timeout

Basketball --Player out of bounds, back in bounds -- Rule ?

<< < (3/5) > >>

Rulesman:

--- Quote from: tdn (Tim) on February 18, 2006, 09:55:20 pm ---Just so it is clear, there was no inbound pass to the player and both the offensive and defensive player were side by side.  So both were out of bounds on the play.  I still don't get it.  I mean the offensive player could step out of bounds and receive a pass from the 1st player and inbound it legally (at least that use to be legal) so why would stepping out of bounds and back inbounds be a violation?

--- End quote ---
You have 2 different situations described here:

1) "...both the offensive and defensive player were side by side.  So both were out of bounds."

OK, you have a basket by Team A. A1 and B1 are out of bounds. Help me understand the play? This is different from what you first asked in the original question.

2) "...the offensive player could step out of bounds and receive a pass from the 1st player and inbound it legally..."

I'm assuming the 2 players referred to are on the same team. If you are talking about B1 taking the ball out after a basket by Team A, then throwing it to B2 who is also out of bounds so B2 can make the throw in, yes that is legal. That has not changed.

ltb759:
The defender cant be oob's. Any of the throwers 4 teammates are authorized to be oob's in this situation.  Rulesman, can you reference a rule that says that a teammate of the thrower cant be oob's in this situation and the re-enter the court inbounds?

Rulesman:

--- Quote from: ltb759 on February 19, 2006, 08:43:08 am ---The defender cant be oob's. Any of the throwers 4 teammates are authorized to be oob's in this situation.  Rulesman, can you reference a rule that says that a teammate of the thrower cant be oob's in this situation and the re-enter the court inbounds?

--- End quote ---
Correct... the defender cannot be OOB. Equally correct... any of the thrower's teammates can be OOB in this situation, however, 9-3-2 states a player cannot leave the court for an unauthorized reason.

The Case Book cites a play that typically occurs where a player trying to avoid a baseline screen runs around the screen by leaving the court under the basket. This applies equally to the offense and defense, and COULD apply in this situation. I emphasize COULD, because it is strictly a judgment call. A2 could legally leave the court to receive a pass from A1 (who is OOB with the ball after a basket by B) and make the throw in to A3, but could not legally leave the court to avoid a defensive screen and come back in to immediately receive the inbounds pass. To do so would be gaining an unfair advantage. Keeping this from happening is within the spirit and intent of 9-3-2.

ltb759:
The casebook play on page 4 :comments on the 95-06 revisions; says...the violation will be called as soon as the player leaves the court. Not when the player re-enters the court. Once again, any of the throwers teammates are authorized to be oob's. A2 could legally leave the court and NOT receive a pass from A1 who decided to throw in to A3.  This is a good discussion, ill keep thinking on this and see if anything else pops up.

Rulesman:

--- Quote from: ltb759 on February 19, 2006, 09:29:49 am ---The casebook play on page 4 :comments on the 95-06 revisions; says...the violation will be called as soon as the player leaves the court. Not when the player re-enters the court. Once again, any of the throwers teammates are authorized to be oob's. A2 could legally leave the court and NOT receive a pass from A1 who decided to throw in to A3.  This is a good discussion, ill keep thinking on this and see if anything else pops up.

--- End quote ---
Yes,  the violation is supposed to be called when the player leaves the court, as opposed to when he returns. In this case, we have (if you will) an apparent exception to the rule. You really need to let the situation develop. Calling the violation too soon would be an injustice to Team A since he does have a right, as you cite, to be there. Then again, the example I gave earlier is one time he shouldn't be OOB. The administering official really needs to see what A2 is doing/or going to do while OOB before passing judgement. Agreed?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version