Hey Ref! DOMINATE at Basketball Throw in | NFHS Basketball Rules Expert

Рет қаралды 5,634

3 жыл бұрын

Today's throw-in in basketball episode finishes our basketball throw ins series using NFHS Basketball Rules. We cover full throw-in restrictions on defenders, when a team can run the end line during a throw-in, and alternating possession throw-in.
Special Thanks to our Channel Supporters:
➞ Donald Griffin
➞ Isaac Rugali
➞ Mike Wong (Super Supporter)
Subscribe to the channel if you are interested in being A Better Official. Our content is geared to the basketball referee who wants to improve as an official and take control of their officiating career.
If you have any questions about what I've covered today then ask me in the KZfaq comments, or
▽ Let’s connect!
➞ Website abetterofficial.com/contact
➞ Twitter / betterofficials
➞ FaceBook / betterofficials
➞ Email bre@abetterofficial.com
OTHER VIDEO PLAYLISTS:
• Basketball Rules Expert
bit.ly/breshows
• 2-Person High School Mechanics
bit.ly/YT-2p
• Wired officials videos
bit.ly/wiredrefs
• You Make the Call
bit.ly/YT-YMTC
• 3-person High School Mechanics videos
bit.ly/yt-3p
• 5 Minutes on Officiating
bit.ly/YT-FMOO
• Full Game Videos
bit.ly/YT-FullGames
As always, keep working hard and let's get better together. abetterofficial.com
---------------------------------
Note: This video is archival in nature. Rules, interpretations, mechanics, philosophies and other information may or may not be correct for the current year.
▽ Music Credits
➞ Parasail / Artist: Silent Partner
Let’s Get Started
When we talked last week about restrictions on the thrower, we were referring exclusively to 9-2-10, which States that a defensive player may not extend any part of their body through the boundary plane. They cannot reach across the boundary plane with their arms, hands or their feet. This is still the case, but what we didn’t talk about is there is no such restriction on the thrower. The thrower is allowed to extend the ball through the boundary plane, have their arms and the ball extended onto the court.
What then are the restrictions on the defensive player? Obviously the ball is on this side of the boundary plane for them. We will talk about that. But first of all, a defensive player during a throw in is not allowed to extend any part of their body through the boundary plane. If they do, the penalty is a delay of game warning to the team. So the opponent of the thrower extends through the boundary plane. The official blows their whistle and issues a delay of game warning to the team goes through the proper procedure of notifying the, the head coach notifying the book of the warning, but a warning is the penalty for reaching a hand through the plane. If the team has already received a delay of game warning for any of the items that a warning can be issued for the result is a team technical foul for incurring this violation after a warning had been given. So the result would be a team technical would be two free throws for the offended team and the ball at the division line, opposite the table. Simple, straightforward.
Now let’s say our defensive player extends a hand through the boundary plane and touches or dislodges the basketball. Now we have a technical foul for a player reaching through the boundary plane and contacting the basketball or dislodging the basketball. The result for that is a player technical foul. That’s a technical foul on the offending player. Two free throws by any player or eligible substitute the ball at the division line, opposite the table. That’s where the resulting throw in would be. In addition to a player, technical, foul being assessed, there is also a delay of game warning that is assessed to the team. So it’s a double whammy. They get both the technical foul and the warning. If the defensive player reaches through the boundary plane and contacts, the thrower hits the thrower, holding the ball, slap them on the wrist. That is an intentional foul assessed to the defensive player.
In addition to the intentional foul, there’s also carries with it a delay of game warning for breaking the plane important to know that that always comes with either of those two situations. When we have an intentional foul, the penalty of which is the offended player or their eligible substitute, we’ll shoot two free throws and the ball will be taken out at the spot nearest the foul player or their substitute. If they were injured, say shoots two free throws. And then we come back to the original spot for the resulting throw-in. So reaches through contacts, the basketball player, technical, any player shoots two free throws ball at the division line, opposite the table. Plus the delay of game warning, same player reaches through the boundary plane contacts, the thrower, an intentional foul, two free throws for the offended player and the resulting throw-in his back at the spot.

Пікірлер: 51

@dennishall8050 3 жыл бұрын

Greg. I love your training videos. But in the last one I think you were indicating that with a previous delay of game warning with another reach through and contact with ball or thrower both foul and violation would be enforced. Case Book 10.4.10D A1 is out of bounds for a throw-in. B1reaches through the boundary plane and knocks the ball out of A1’s hand. Earlier in the game Team B had received a team warning for delay. Ruling: Even though Team B had already been issued a warning for team delay, when B1 breaks the plane and subsequently contacts the ball in the thrower’s hand, it is considered all the same act and the end result is penalized.

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Dennis, thank you! That is the missing piece. I believe that in the video itself I left the door open to the enforcement of both. In another comment thread below with Tony Dye I suggested that there had been no guidance from NFHS on this question. The case play you bring up obviously provides that guidance. Thank you for setting me straight.

@dennishall8050 3 жыл бұрын

Really Greg, the video left me thinking both would be penalized. And I’m a rules instructor for our association, I thought this is one I missed That’s why I got into the case book so I could explain it to the membership. Maybe a correction video with this case book play would be helpful.

@rebeccapatton5414 3 жыл бұрын

Dennis Hall thanks for sharing out of the case book. I had the same question and just want to clarify this rule- in this instance where B1 contacts the ball outside the boundary plane even if a delay of game warning has been issued previously you would just penalize the personal technical foul on B1, right?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

@@rebeccapatton5414 Correct!

@gohtvandenbrink3528 3 ай бұрын

@8:29 Greg your minion is so cute. ha ha

@brandonmason7657 3 жыл бұрын

Alameda High vs Salesian boys varsity at Salesian, Alameda player has a throw in after a Salesian made basket, Alameda fakes the throw in and puts the ball on the inbounds part of the court, the Salesian defender takes the ball out of the Alameda players hands and scores a basket. It happened so quick the Alameda player complained about the play. Th Alameda team calls a timeout. During the timeout I explained to the player that the play was legal by rule. So yes that type of play does and will happen during a game. Please be aware and pay attention. Nice job explaining this Mr. Expert!! I like the music selection!! 🤗💕🤗

@kgerman1 3 жыл бұрын

Whoa, how'd I miss this? I've certainly penalized defensive players for both forms of boundary line fouls - hit player vs ball - but somehow missed the additional component of team delay of game warning/penalty. Well alrighty. Thank you! Now, for my Type A comment. In Q1, option B is certainly the correct answer, but the wording is incorrect it seems to me - i.e. it says "now be..." instead of "continue to be" since the arrow was already pointing in A's direction. Don't hate! :) Great stuff as always!!!

@shanejones8884 3 жыл бұрын

What about a ball being into play after a dead ball with .3 or less on the clock?

@johnturzer9866 3 жыл бұрын

Consider adding to the discussion - a team Technical (say Team A) counts towards the team foul totals for the bonus and double bonus, the thrower steps on the boundary line but not onto the court, is stepping onto the boundary line during the throw in considered stepping onto the court, thrower A1 extends ball over the boundary line on a throw in, B1 hits A1's hand(s) (not wrist or arms) and the ball is dislodged. foul, nothing and what happens to the AP arrow.

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

John, you are in luck! All those points are covered in subsequent videos in the series

@Panarchy9 3 жыл бұрын

A1 is the thrower on the sideline near the corner of the the sideline/endline. In an attempt to throw it crosscourt to his teammate he chucks it through the air and the ball hits the rim but does NOT go in the basket nor get lodged on the rim. Since this is not a made basket nor a lodged ball, my understanding is: this is a live ball, play on. Is that correct?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Yes. Yes it is.

@gbates5414 3 жыл бұрын

A player extends the ball across the plain and a tie up ensues!!! If A is out during the tie up....wouldnt he be out? You said it would be a jumpball? Love the knowledge. I carry with me onto the court.

@sonicart4500 3 жыл бұрын

what was the outcome, still held ball / possession arrow?

@gbates5414 3 жыл бұрын

@@sonicart4500 posession arrow!

@rebeccapatton5414 3 жыл бұрын

I was working a game with a seasoned official where we attempted resumption of play procedure at the division line to start the period. A defensive player panicked thinking it was their team who was supposed to in bound the ball so they reached across the oob plane and grabbed the ball and attempted a throw in. The coach for the offensive team wanted a T for the throw in boundary violation. What is the ruling?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

It *IS* a boundary plane violation, but it is *NOT* a player technical for contacting the ball.

@philhaddad5495 2 жыл бұрын

Greg I saw a play this summer at a team camp/tournament. A2 was throwing the ball in after a made basket A1 steps out of bounds parallel to A2 a d A2 throws the ball to A1 and A1 throws the ball in bounds. I heard complain I'm thinking hey thats a legal play.

@BetterOfficials 2 жыл бұрын

Yes, legal! Ball may be passed out of bounds between teammates during a throw-in after a made basket.

@jackdavis874 3 жыл бұрын

I believe in the last question you forgot that a delay of game warning would also be issued, or does this not apply for when the thrower is extended beyond the plane?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Jack, it would NOT apply because there has been no plane violation when the ball is extended over the court.

@darwinsanada8309 3 жыл бұрын

When inbounding after a basket made... The thrower is out of bounds... The coach wants another thrower to inbound the ball... In the exchange the thrower tosses the ball to the player who still has inbound status catches the ball before establishing out of bounds with either feet to be the new throw in player...Greg had a game where this happen and the coach was arguing that they are allowed to do this by rule...Does the inbound player need to establish out of bound status before touching the ball?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Q: When does the throw-in begin in this situation? If it had begun, then the throwing team violates. Either traveling by the player who ball was tossed to or oob by that player. If the ball had been passed to a teammate with out of bounds status then it would be legal.

@Mistah9778 3 жыл бұрын

If a Delay of Game Warning has already been issued and In a later spot throw in the defense reaches across boundary line a second time and hits user on the wrist arm.....I know it will result in an intentional foul for the contact based on video, but does it compound and they also get a technical team foul assessed for the boundary crossing again as well ?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Hi Tony. I have never seen guidance from NFHS on this question. *Logically* both would be penalized.

@jeffwright7587 3 жыл бұрын

@@BetterOfficials Wouldn't the ball be dead as soon as the defender reached through the boundary plane, so only the team technical for a second delay would be penalized (assuming the contact wasn't flagrant)?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

I suppose that you could make that argument for *all* reach through and contact (ball or player) plays. Case play wouldn't support that position.

@jeffwright7587 3 жыл бұрын

@@BetterOfficials Good point

@lukepersall9901 3 жыл бұрын

If a thrower extends the ball through the boundary line and a defender touches the ball does that give the ball inbound status? Should we chop the clock? And, if they touch it and release the ball, is it out of bounds on the thrower since they are standing out of bounds?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Those are good questions, and are very logical. NFHS in this situation has to do some fudging. The thrower is not considered to be out of bounds as in an out-of-bounds violation in any of the scenarios you describe. During a designated spot throw-in, the clock starts when the ball is legally touched in bounds after the thrower has released the throw in pass.

@lukepersall9901 3 жыл бұрын

@@BetterOfficials Okay, so by the sound of it, if the ball is just touched we would keep our 5 second count and just keep on as usual? Thanks for the reply!

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Yes!

@jonbrandt5125 2 жыл бұрын

Really interesting video…what happens if, after a made basket, player A1 attempts to pass the ball to A2, who is out of bounds (parallel to A1). As the ball is passed, player B2 reaches over the boundary line and touches the ball. Is that a technical foul on B2?

@BetterOfficials 2 жыл бұрын

Hi Jon, Player Technical Foul and Delay of Game warning if one had not previously been given.

@hmsjr0154 3 жыл бұрын

Greg The link for the quiz is not working?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

It was going to quiz 3. Sorry. Fixed now for you?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

OK. Try again.

@Panarchy9 3 жыл бұрын

Hey Greg, you describe how 7-5-7 lets the throw-in team pass the ball on the end line and not need a designated spot. That rule says: "A throw-in anywhere along the end line after a goal or an awarded goal ...the team not credited with the score shall make a throw-in from the end of the court where the goal was made and from any point outside the end line..." Does that include made free throws? I went to my trusty Rule 4 for definitions, but the word "goal" is actually not defined to either include or exclude a free throw. 4-20-1 defines a "free throw" as "an unhindered try for goal", so I suppose that implies a made free throw also triggers the 7-5-7 privilege? Can you speak to this?

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

Yes. After *any* goal (or violation such as BI or GT) and that includes FT.

@ericbelleville9845 3 жыл бұрын

In the last segment....with the thrower reaching through the boundary plane then being fouled by a defender with a smack on the wrist.....somebody explain to me why would the rules would state specifically that the thrown in player may penetrate the boundary plane (as long as they don't touch the boundary line) and in that case the defender may legally touch or grasp the ball....then on the other hand if a foul occurs on a part of the throw in player's body that was reached through the boundary plane make it automatically an intentional foul. The automatic intentional foul should only apply if the defender reaches through boundary plane. It seems like the rule is designed to protect the throw in player as long as they stay on the out of bounds side of the boundary line and that once they reach through that plane, that protection is gone. What makes it intentional is the defender reaching through the boundary plane....That's how I read it. I'm happy to hear some interpretations. I see from reading below that nobody gets any responses....unfortunate.

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

What makes sense logically doesn't always jibe with the rules as written. Here, we discuss the rules as they are, not how we would prefer them to be. Are you disputing the interpretation?

@ericbelleville9845 3 жыл бұрын

@@BetterOfficials I am disputing it. I don’t think the rule as written is intended to penalize a defender with an intentional foul if he or she doesn’t reach through the boundary plane to contact the thrower. The note in that section that basically says when the throw in player crosses into the inbound plane the ball is fair game is my reason. As long as the foul does not qualify as a defined intentional foul and the foul takes place on a body part that is now on the inbounds side of the boundary plane. Thank you for helping me sort this out. Right or wrong I will come out of this with a better understanding of the rule.

@BetterOfficials 3 жыл бұрын

@@ericbelleville9845 Here is the case play that can help. 9.2.10 SITUATION B: Team A has a (a) designated spot throw-in, or (b) alternating-possession throw-in along the end line. Thrower A1 extends the ball with his/her arms over the end line such that part of the forearms, hands, and the ball are entirely on the inbounds side of the boundary line. B2 slaps A1 on the wrist and dislodges the ball. RULING: In (a) and (b), when a defender makes contact with a thrower-in, the result is an intentional foul. Where A1’s arms are located (on the inbounds or out-of-bounds side of the boundary line) is immaterial. A1 is awarded two free throws and Team A awarded a throw-in at the spot nearest the foul. In (b), since the throw-in did not end, the arrow remains with Team A. (4-19-3e; 6-4-5; 7-5-4b; 9-2-10 PENALTY 4)

@ericbelleville9845 3 жыл бұрын

@@BetterOfficials thank you. I will review the info you reference.

@ericbelleville9845 3 жыл бұрын

I read Article 10...it states clearly that the opponents of the thrower shall not have any part of his or her person through the boundary plane. The penalties for violating Article 10 are then listed....including the contact with the thrower being an intentional foul. That is all very clear. What I am saying is that you should not punish a defender for violating Article 10 when in fact he or she did not violate Article 10. If no boundary plane was penetrated by the defender, Article 10 was not violated....so the list of penalties do not apply. In a nutshell....you cannot penalize for a violation of Article 10 unless Article 10 is violated....which in your scenario it is not. There was no boundary plane violation by either player....the wrist slap was the only thing in question. Thoughts? And the note below Article 10 doesn’t clear things up either....I think it adds more questions than answers.