• Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.

Official Rule - The Inbounds Pass Off the Bottom of the Backboard

AE Braves Fan said:


RULE 7
Out of Bounds and
the Throw-in
Section 1. Out of Bounds—Player, Ball​


Art. 1.
A player shall be out of bounds when he or she touches the floor or
any object other than a player on or outside a boundary line. An airborne
player’s status shall be where he or she was last in contact with the floor.
Art. 2. ​

​

The ball shall be out of bounds when it touches a player who is out of
bounds; any other person, the floor, or any object on or outside a boundary;
the supports or back of the backboard; or the ceiling, overhead equipment
or supports.
Art. 3. ​

​

The ball shall be out of bounds when it passes over the backboard
from any direction.
​
​
​
​






The ball hit off the bottom of the backboard, not the back of the backboard. I think it was the right call, even though the moronic ref said it hit the rim (not really possible). Tough break.​

​
Click to expand...

What about BU's shot the was waved off in the first half. It looked to me from Sec HH that the ball bounced off the top of the board and then went through the hoop:!: Whats the difference:?::evil:
​
 
Out of Bounce said:
What about BU's shot the was waved off in the first half. It looked to me from Sec HH that the ball bounced off the top of the board and then went through the hoop:!: Whats the difference:?::evil:
[/LEFT]
Click to expand...


On this one, right call, the ball hit the shotclock (or that's how it looked to me on TV).

I don't think the refs made the right call on the inbounds play, but there are plenty of calls that go that way in any given game. As far as it goes, I thought these refs did a pretty decent job on the game, so I have no complaints. Was a good game by both teams, just didn't quite go in our favor.
 
It hit the backboard

It hit the backboard

Da Coach said:
Jim Les said the officials told him the ball hit the rim, therefore was in play.
Click to expand...

as anyone who watched the replay or watched it live could see. The refs blew the call and should've reviewed it, period. I watched the replay and there is no doubt, no question, and anyone who says other wise is wrong and lying.
 
There is no way this ball just hit the bottom of the back board, it came almost straight down. If it had hit the bottom of the back board it would have been more of a glancing blow and would have went farther out on the court.

Just another case of Bradley not getting a call in a critical part of the game.

I will admit other than that call I don't think the game was called to badly.

I think we lost the game by not playing very well in the first 10 minutes.
 
tornado said:
it's the ref's call.. I have seen it called both ways...
I have seen the exact same play called out of bounds, but this time they allowed it.

anyway...the guy who inbounded the ball cannot be the first one to touch it once it's in bounds...and that's also what appeared to happen.
Click to expand...

Tornado, I just finished watching the replay several times. It is quite clear by the angle the ball caromed it could not of hit the back of the backboard. The ball came forward and the thrower in is NOT THE FIRST to touch it. It comes directly to #12 who is in front of the backboard in the lane about 3-4 feet in front of the hoop. If the ball would have hit the back of the backboard it would have caromed backwards and it DID NOT it went forward.Did the official error in saying it hit the ring? Yes he did. It would have been impossible to hit the ring with an over hand pass from under the basket. Bottom line is we are complaining again about a rule interpratation that we know nothing about. I love Dave, Coach and Bisch but they agreed it hit the bottom of the board and as someone has pointed out by rule in another post THAT IS LEGAL. The easy way to remember this rule is ALL four edges of the backboard are in play but, the ball may NOT pass over the top from either direction. Great effort by our Braves , we just came up short. I would like one more crack at them in ST. Louis. Go Braves
 
I've seen the bottom/back of the backboard called in games at lower levels (Mostly grade school) and those refs invariably call it out of bounds FWIW...
 
wily coyote said:
Tornado, I just finished watching the replay several times. It is quite clear by the angle the ball caromed it could not of hit the back of the backboard. The ball came forward and the thrower in is NOT THE FIRST to touch it. It comes directly to #12 who is in front of the backboard in the lane about 3-4 feet in front of the hoop. If the ball would have hit the back of the backboard it would have caromed backwards and it NOT it went forward.Did the official error in saying it hit the ring? Yes he did. It would have been impossible to hit the ring with an over hand pass from under the basket. Bottom line is we are complaining again about a rule interpratation that we know nothing about. I love Dave, Coach and Bisch but they agreed it hit the bottom of the board and as someone has pointed out by rule in another post THAT IS LEGAL. The easy way to remember this rule is ALL four edges of the backboard are in play but, the ball may NOT pass over the top from either direction. Great effort by our Braves , we just came up short. I would like one more crack at them in ST. Louis. Go Braves
Click to expand...

any one who calls the RIM the ring doesn't know the first thing about basketball and shouldn't comment on it!
 
Dr Hong said:
I've seen the bottom/back of the backboard called in games at lower levels (Mostly grade school) and those refs invariably call it out of bounds FWIW...
Click to expand...
Dr Hong with all due respect to those officials working the grade school level, thats why you may have seen it called that way. If you see a varsity or college official call the bottom of the board OB they have ERRED. End of story.
 
tornado said:
yes, hong, that I have seen also...

and wily...re-read what I said....I believe the ball hit some other structure on the back of the board such as some support that caused it to deflect more downward that just alter course and continue flying downcourt as it would have done had it hit the padding on the bottom of the board.
Click to expand...
Tornado, I appreciate how you are trying to make this fit your line of thought, but there is nothing behind the backboard could cause this type of deflection other then the support that holds the board to the standard and it is not near the bottom of the board. Next time your at Carver look near the bottom of the board and see whats there. The support is much higher and could not have put the ball back onto the court that far up the lane.If the ball hit the corner of the padding it very well could have deflected at an angle and not flew down court. Since this was a judgement call we probably will have to agree to disagree unlike the intentional foul we bantered back and forth on at UNI. The Valley office DID come back after reviewing the films and said it was the correct call. But lets not go there again thats over and the officials were found to have gotten the call correct. Go Braves
 
tornado said:
what?
There are HUGE white arms that reaches out to support the backboard on each side?
The ends of those arms are padded in red and easily visible on any picture from Redbird Arena.

Those supports are RIGHT at the bottom of the board.

Check picture number 14 in this slide show...also picture #20....it is so obvious...
http://goredbirds.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/recaps/013109aab.html#

the exact same support is also visible on this pic and is padded in red on the lower left & right of the backboard.

midsize_photo49851da24c2cc281968713.jpg


if the ball hits this support structure, it is OUT OF BOUNDS.
Click to expand...

Tornado, I stand corrected. Your photos and the tape do show supports that would be OB. Now we just have to agree to disagree if the ball actually hit one of them. It happens so fast you can not tell on video if it is the support or the bottom. That I will admit. Lets get something straight here I'm not trying to SNIPE anothers opinion at all. I'm only trying to educate some people on the rules and how they are applied. The guys in stripes do not give a tinkers d-- who wins or loses. They are to apply the rules to the best of there ability. We for years have thought the Valley lacked in good officials and I agree to some extent but we have to deal with it.
 
tornado said:
If you stand out of bounds, you are 4 feet or more from the back of the back board and to hit the hoop on the other side of the backboard would require the inbounder to toss the ball underhanded.
I can't see how a guy throwing the ball overhanded could possibly get the ball under the backboard and still at a high enough angle to hit the rim...just not possible.
Click to expand...
Tornado, I agree with your observation. It is impossible to hit the ring from where he was at so I think we both disagree with the officials ruling that it hit the rim. You and I both agree on that point. My only contention that disagrees with you is where it did hit. I think from the angle that it comes off , it was the bottom of the board. Your only argument that could be is it hit one of the supports behind the basket. I can not say for sure that did not happen so we both just have to support what we thought happened. I'm not changing your mind and until I see something more clearer as to where it hit, you won't change mine. I'm sorry to say I have to agree with the call or in this case no call.
 
I was watching the game at BWW, and when the play occurred, I thought it was out-of-bounds and possession to BU...but the person I was with said if it hits the bottom of the board, the ball is still in play. That's what I thought happened (hit the bottom of the board), without the benefit of a replay. I simply didn't know the rule.
 
wily coyote said:
Tornado, I stand corrected. Your photos and the tape do show supports that would be OB. Now we just have to agree to disagree if the ball actually hit one of them. It happens so fast you can not tell on video if it is the support or the bottom. That I will admit. Lets get something straight here I'm not trying to SNIPE anothers opinion at all. I'm only trying to educate some people on the rules and how they are applied. The guys in stripes do not give a tinkers d-- who wins or loses. They are to apply the rules to the best of there ability. We for years have thought the Valley lacked in good officials and I agree to some extent but we have to deal with it.
Click to expand...

I am not saying the call was right or wrong. I was in 3rd row upper bowl right behind that basket and all I know is that ball hit something?
However,
These 3 Paul Jannsen, David Hall, and Terry Wymer are NOT "bad officials."
They are 3 of the best nationally. They are involved in many BCS nationally televised games.
 
BuHeaven

BuHeaven

If it is in play or not,they should have a least checked the play,just as
they would a 3pt play.but to say it hit the rim.....come on...that is why
they have replay,or get rid of it....:?:
 
I had a chance to speak ith Chuck after the game and he told me that he was told the ball hit the rim and after looking at the replay it looked like that is what happened. He thought it was a bad call at first but then realized they made the right call. Can't be upset with this one. Lets move on and make some layups!!!!!
 
TheHeemyMonster said:
I had a chance to speak ith Chuck after the game and he told me that he was told the ball hit the rim and after looking at the replay it looked like that is what happened. He thought it was a bad call at first but then realized they made the right call. Can't be upset with this one. Lets move on and make some layups!!!!!
Click to expand...

We couldn't make layups....the "ring" :) wasn't kind to us. I think our players kept hitting the structures behind the basket.:) Thats the ONLY thing that could explain Sammy's miss. For the record HIS mis didn't cost us the game either.

TO me this was a perfect storm of events that just went wrong......in the end we can only blame ourselves. GREAT effort.....gimme that every nite and will win more games then we lose.
 
Not blamming just Sammys layup but how about DC's 3 or 4 gimmes as well as a couple of Dodies terrible shots hard off the glass around the rim.
 
First of all you cannot use replay on that inbounds play, also I do believe those 3 refs did a good job , I think the call was missed as it hit the under portion of the basket , the other point I would like to make is the review by Jim Bain on the intentional foul called at N.Iowa , that was and still is a horrible call and of course he is going to agree with his officiating crew that it was correct , now those 3 refs doing that game were bad . Officials are going to make mistakes but I just ask that they be consistent and impartial and let the players decide who is going to win, I think most of our games have been officiated fairly well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top