menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: Rule change
Page: 1 of 1
Pataskala
General User
P
Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,465
person
mail
Pataskala
mail
Posted: 3/29/2015 7:12 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Here's a rule that should be changed. A Duke player leaped out of bounds to save a ball and knocked it off a Gonzaga player who was already out of bounds. The ball was awarded to Duke. Since the Gonzaga player had established his position out of bounds, he should be considered part of the out-of-bounds area, same as the goal stanchion or the scorer's table or anybody sitting on the bench.
bobcat695
General User
B695
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Parkersburg, WV
Post Count: 1,345
person
mail
bobcat695
mail
Posted: 3/29/2015 7:59 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Couldn't disagree more. That was a great play. 10 players on the court, all in play.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,685
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 3/29/2015 11:21 PM
settings_applications edit_note
I could not agree more Pataskala. In fact, I thought that was already the rule. It seems so obvious to me that once a player is out-of-bounds, he is basically part of the out-of-bounds area. I don't recall ever seeing a play like that called the way it was in this case. I just thought the refs made a big mistake. Now, you tell me that's the rule. It's kind of totally baffling to me. I'm don't recall in any pickup games I've played ever seeing a player interpret the rule that way.
UpSan Bobcat
General User
Member Since: 8/30/2005
Location: Upper Sandusky, OH
Post Count: 3,817
mail
UpSan Bobcat
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 8:12 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Seems like a simple call. If a player is out-of-bounds and touches a ball that previously was in play, the ball is out off of that player.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 8:35 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
Here's a rule that should be changed. A Duke player leaped out of bounds to save a ball and knocked it off a Gonzaga player who was already out of bounds. The ball was awarded to Duke. Since the Gonzaga player had established his position out of bounds, he should be considered part of the out-of-bounds area, same as the goal stanchion or the scorer's table or anybody sitting on the bench.
I disagree. Why would he be a non-factor just because he's out of bounds?
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,559
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 10:18 AM
settings_applications edit_note
OUVan wrote:expand_more
Here's a rule that should be changed. A Duke player leaped out of bounds to save a ball and knocked it off a Gonzaga player who was already out of bounds. The ball was awarded to Duke. Since the Gonzaga player had established his position out of bounds, he should be considered part of the out-of-bounds area, same as the goal stanchion or the scorer's table or anybody sitting on the bench.
I disagree. Why would he be a non-factor just because he's out of bounds?
Exactly. if someone was on the bench, that's a different story. If they are checked into the game, then tey are part of the action, and if you're the first one to touch the ball OOB, then it's off you. If you don't want that to happen, then stay in bounds.
Pataskala
General User
P
Member Since: 7/8/2010
Location: At least six feet away from anybody else
Post Count: 9,465
person
mail
Pataskala
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 11:24 AM
settings_applications edit_note
The ball would've hit out of bounds if it hadn't hit the other player who was face down on the floor, out of bounds. Shouldn't get a break for that.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:01 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
The ball would've hit out of bounds if it hadn't hit the other player who was face down on the floor, out of bounds. Shouldn't get a break for that.
If the player hadn't been on the ground the Duke player wouldn't have thrown it there. It wasn't a break. It was a smart play. I don't see the difference between that and throwing it off a player's legs.
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,559
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 12:10 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
The ball would've hit out of bounds if it hadn't hit the other player who was face down on the floor, out of bounds. Shouldn't get a break for that.
Then he should get up and get back in the game.
Toast
General User
Member Since: 3/11/2015
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 178
mail
Toast
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:25 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Didn't only happen in the Duke game. Couldn't agree more. Rule doesn't need changed.

bobcat695 wrote:expand_more
Couldn't disagree more. That was a great play. 10 players on the court, all in play.
Bobcatbob
General User
Member Since: 12/21/2004
Location: Coolville, OH
Post Count: 1,351
mail
Bobcatbob
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 1:33 PM
settings_applications edit_note
If it makes it easier to accept, yesterday in the MSU - Louisville game, I'm pretty sure I saw a ball passed to and caught by a UL player who came (jumped) back in bounds but hadn't established position (landed). I always thought that was automatic out of bounds call. Apparently not so

Same thing seems to happen with time line passes, an area where I see that strict definition of a plane eroding.
OUVan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Bethesda, MD
Post Count: 5,580
mail
OUVan
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 2:45 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Bobcatbob wrote:expand_more
If it makes it easier to accept, yesterday in the MSU - Louisville game, I'm pretty sure I saw a ball passed to and caught by a UL player who came (jumped) back in bounds but hadn't established position (landed). I always thought that was automatic out of bounds call. Apparently not so

Same thing seems to happen with time line passes, an area where I see that strict definition of a plane eroding.
It should have been called. I thought a back-court violation should have been called against Duke yesterday in a similar situation.
perimeterpost
General User
Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 3,165
mail
perimeterpost
mail
Posted: 3/30/2015 3:09 PM
settings_applications edit_note
If a player standing out of bounds doesn't get called for touching the ball while standing out of bounds then there is no such thing as out of bounds.
Showing Messages: 1 - 13 of 13
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)