HS Basketball Throw-In Off Opponent's Face

[Ben E Lou]

Video shows high school basketball player throwing ball at opponent’s face | myfox8.com

Probably completely legal. We did this plenty of times when we couldn't get the ball in, but threw it down at the legs. Never heard of anyone throwing it off the opponent's face like that, though. My first thought is that a rule change is in order: gotta hit him between the belt and the neck or below the knee?

[stevew]

Seemed unnecessary and probably should have drawn a technical for an unsportsmanlike act. That was a lot of velocity at a short range.

[Butter]

That's definitely a technical foul and possibly an ejection.

Dayton Flyer fans still remember an incident in early 1990 when current Xavier coach Chris Mack did this same thing to one of our players.

Below is a cut/paste of a 2009 newspaper article remembering the event on the occasion of Mack being named head coach at Xavier.

Here is the story.....

Nineteen years ago Xavier men’s basketball coach Chris Mack played college hoops for the University of Evansville. And Evansville, on a particular occasion, played Dayton.

So begins a story that has followed Mack since February of 1990, on the night he popped a ball in a defender’s face while taking it out of bounds under Dayton’s basket.

That defender was Wes Coffee, and he was twice hit in the face by different Purple Aces within the game’s first 13 minutes.

Only the second hit came from Mack. But it launched a sequence of events that led to a near melee between teams, a contrite Mack, a dazed Coffee, an apology letter, and a reputation – for Mack – as a perpetual villain to some in Dayton.

The incident resurfaced in whispers around the time of Mack’s April 15 introduction as XU’s new coach. After a little digging, it was clear that there’s no love lost for the Evansville-turned-Xavier transfer player in Dayton annals: first because of the Coffee incident, and second for his decades-old allegiance to the archrival Musketeers.

Last week Mack was asked to set the record straight. What happened that night, and why? He was happy to oblige.

Double trouble

The story, Mack said, starts like this: Evansville was playing a heated rivalry game at Dayton, which was known as a pressing team.

“I think our coach, Jim Crews, was bothered by the fact that the guy guarding the in-bounder was always stepping over the line. He’d warn referees and they never seemed to move them back. It’s one of those rules that’s in there but they didn’t really follow it,” Mack said.

“And he had made the point in the shoot-around the day before, that if that kept happening, ‘You just boink the guy in the nose with the ball. I’m tired of this.’ We all sort of chuckled and he said, ‘I’m serious. You’re going to boink him in the nose.’”

(Crews, by the way, was a member of Indiana’s 1976 national championship team, led by Bobby Knight. He spent eight years as Hoosier assistant on Knight’s coaching staff before a successful 17-year run at Evansville.)

The day after the shoot-around, the Purple Aces didn’t play well. They were down by 10 or 12 points, Mack said, when his teammate in-bounded the ball under the Flyers’ hoop.

According to Mack and the Dayton Daily News’ account of the game, Evansville guard Scott Schreffler was nearing the end of the five second count and Coffee, a forward/center, was guarding him.

Schreffler threw the ball into Coffee’s face, the paper said. Coffee was stunned, his lip split. He thought it might have been an accident; he was a 7-footer, and an obstacle to get around.

Ten minutes later, then-sophomore Mack was in Schreffler’s place and needed to in-bound the ball against the Flyers’ press.

“The same guy (Coffee) is on the ball and it’s getting close to a five count, and I looked long and I threw it and hit him right in the nose,” Mack said.

At that point most onlookers thought Mack had thrown the ball twice, a misconception he last week wanted to rectify. He said he only threw it once. Coffee agreed.

Still, many in the arena grew incensed – like Coffee’s teammate, Negele Knight, who took the incident personally, the Dayton Daily News said. Knight ran from the wing of Dayton’s press and chest-bumped Mack.

“That’s all I could do,” Knight told the newspaper. “I knew if I started a fight, I’d get thrown out. So I just bumped him to see if I could get a reaction. He didn’t react.”
Following orders

Coffee was shocked after Mack hit him with the ball and remained, for a while, angry.

“Chris hit me really, really good, square on nose and mouth, and split my lip even further. That’s when people realized it was intentional, and there was an uproar,” said Coffee, who lives in Alabama and recently recounted the story.

He didn’t retaliate.

“Even if I wanted to swing, I didn’t know what direction to swing because my eyes were watering so much,” Coffee said.

The referee called a technical foul on Mack, the Dayton Daily News said. The teams shoved each other and the atmosphere was charged, but no fighting took place.

Mack was the only Purple Ace who tried to shake hands after the Flyers’ 23-point win, according to the Dayton Daily News story.

He told its reporter he was sorry, and that he was trying to throw the ball over Coffee’s head – but under the bottom of the backboard – to beat the five-second count.

Mack last week said the latter comments were meant to protect his coach. He took the game to heart and said the Coffee incident contributed to his decision to transfer.

Crews, who became Army’s head coach in 2002, on Monday supported Mack’s account of the game. It sure was a long time ago, Crews said, and he didn’t remember the first ball thrown at Coffee, but Mack did what he was told.

“He followed orders,” Crews said.

Crews said he warned his players then that Dayton defenders were going to keep crossing the line, per their coach’s instruction. If officials weren’t going to whistle them for violations, UD’s players would continue the behavior, Crews said.

Coffee said he never crossed he end line and went out of bounds. He didn’t have to, he said, because his “arms and legs were long enough” to defend the pass.
Lessons learned

Once he returned to Evansville, the exchange weighed on Mack. He composed an apology to Coffee and slipped it in the mail.

“For him to write the letter … I definitely didn’t expect that. He hoped I would forgive him,” Coffee said. “I thought that was very classy. I never held any ill-will against him.”

The next year Mack transferred to Xavier, where he went on to be a two-time captain. He said he loved Crews as a coach, but “those type of things” led him out of Evansville.

“I felt bad. I want to compete and I want to win but I’m not going to do it that way,” Mack said.

Coffee today wishes only the best for Mack and was congratulatory about his new role at XU. Although Mack has moved on, too, he won’t forget.

“Not only did I learn a lesson as a player but I really learned more of a lesson as a coach, dealing with kids,” Mack said. “It’s about competing and being nasty and tough, but it’s also about shaking their hand and doing it the right way.”

Time doesn’t always sway those who hold grudges. Despite the fact that his wife, Christi, was a Flyer, Mack probably won’t get a warm reception the first time he leads XU at UD Arena.

To that end, two things are certain: The Xavier-Dayton animosity will live on, and Mack – a Musketeer through-and-through – doesn’t expect to make any new Dayton friends. The Coffee incident ensured as much.

“I became the villain at Dayton,” Mack said. “And I’ve got no problem with that.”

[Sweed]

The year UNLV won the NCAA title under Tarkanian ('87?) they did this against Iowa in the tournament. No call. Iowa was up 16 at the half and 18 at one point and IIRC this came while UNLV was losing badly and seemed more like frustration\retaliation for getting beat. I remember being pissed that there wasn't some type of call on the play.

I think the ref should be able to make an unsportsmanlike call on his own but probably better to have a rule to take any gray area out of it.

[CraigSca]

Watching this, the kid should be suspended indefinitely. That was a borderline crime.

[Umbrella]

I'm pretty sure Danny Ainge did this in the playoffs against the Rockets when he was on the Suns.

ETA: Yep, here it is.

[Atocep]

Should have been a technical. I've seen it called at the high school level for similar incidents.

[Ben E Lou]

I'm confused at some of the responses. If it's legal to throw it off of the guy's legs to get the same result, and there's no explicit rule against "dangerous play". then how can the ref call a tech there? Not sure about the "dangerous play" part, but it certainly seems that the ref was looking right at the play.

Rules are designed to make the game fair and keep the players safe. The problem to me seems to be the rule (or lack thereof, specifically.)

Atocep, have you seen it called on an inbounds play like that?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Atocep, have you seen it called on an inbounds play like that?

I've seen it called twice. Once on an inbounds playy very similar to that and once a trapped player threw the ball directly into another player's groin. Both times the games were pretty heated and it was obvious that it was done purposely. I've also seen players trying to save a ball from going out of bounda hit guys in the face with no call.

The ref can give a technical for malicious or unsportsmanlike play and in my opinion should have here.

My guess is the ref was looking right at it, but focused on other things and the thought of someone doing that on purpose didn't cross his mind. He also may have been inexperienced and didn't know what to do.

[albionmoonlight]

Don't most leagues have a general "unsportsmanlike conduct" type of foul?

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

Don't most leagues have a general "unsportsmanlike conduct" type of foul?

I've seen it called in soccer on an inbounder who clearly intentionally hit someone, though I've also seen it called on the person who got hit in the face because it's illegal to deliberately step in front of the goalie as they're outletting the ball.

But yes, both soccer and lacrosse have language giving broad latitude to the refs for unnatural & dangerous play, and I assume basketball refs have the same discretion to give that kid a technical.

(PS my biggest thought watching that video was wow, that is a terrible looking HS.)

[stevew]

I'm pretty sure the ref thought he was trying to make a pass to another player. But I don't think that looks like his intent at all. But that probably explains why the ref didn't T him up. Or the ref was making $75 a game and has to make his overnight cashier job at flying j.

[MrBug708]

Tim Morris' cheap shot on Alfred Aboya - YouTube

Clearly intent and the play just continued without anything being done

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I'm confused at some of the responses. If it's legal to throw it off of the guy's legs to get the same result, and there's no explicit rule against "dangerous play". then how can the ref call a tech there? Not sure about the "dangerous play" part, but it certainly seems that the ref was looking right at the play.

Rules are designed to make the game fair and keep the players safe. The problem to me seems to be the rule (or lack thereof, specifically.)

A ref can call a play unnecessary and reckless at any time if he feels something has been done with intent. What happened there was far different from throwing the ball at a guys legs or off his back on the inbounds pass.

I think the ref thought it was an attempted pass and that's why he didn't T the kid up. The reality is this was a clear cheap shot and should have been an immediate ejection.

[CraigSca]

Here's how it should be done

Keith Gatlin's Inbounds Pass - YouTube

[Butter]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I'm confused at some of the responses. If it's legal to throw it off of the guy's legs to get the same result, and there's no explicit rule against "dangerous play". then how can the ref call a tech there? Not sure about the "dangerous play" part, but it certainly seems that the ref was looking right at the play.

Rules are designed to make the game fair and keep the players safe. The problem to me seems to be the rule (or lack thereof, specifically.)

You're not going to bloody a guy's leg or knock him unconscious by throwing it off his leg or arm. There's a difference even between back of the head and face, I would think. The velocity probably also has something to do with it.

[HeavyReign]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

Tim Morris' cheap shot on Alfred Aboya - YouTube

Clearly intent and the play just continued without anything being done

This immediately came to mind. I miss watching relevant Husky basketball.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Butter

The velocity probably also has something to do with it.

Do we get a juggs gun for every court to determine whether velocity warrants a call?

Just watched the video.

Though the camera angle isn't perfect, it looks as though the inbounder has a teammate cutting relatively hard to where the pass would have gone if it hadn't been blocked by the defender's head. There's certainly reason to throw a pass with a lot of zip on it in that situation, especially if he's trying to thread the needle into the doubleteam the receiver was working against.

[stevew]

The angle was so bad, but it just looked like that pass was to the defender's face. I don't see how it was even close to being for the guy in the lane.

[Swaggs]

I think a suspension is in order there, regardless of whether there is a specific rule or not. General human decency suggests that you do not use sports equipment to harm fellow players in a game.

If you've played sports, you experience opponents getting hurt. I was really aggressive when I played baseball, but you still feel like shit if you see another kid get hit by a pitch in the head or taken out/injured on a slide. The inbounding player's apparent reaction, having no empathy or remorse for doing something like that, is fairly scary to me (unless he didn't realize, which seems unlikely in the situation). If he'd shown any kind of concern or reaction over the other player falling the way he did, I could buy that it was unintentional. I'm not ready to label the kid a sociopath or suggest it was assault for doing something stupid in a heated, competitive game, but it was still dangerous and stupid and deserves some type of punishment (and probably some mandated counseling if this a pattern of behavior, rather than an isolated event).

Sidenote to add to the inbounds stories. The absolute worst pain that I ever experienced was from guarding an inbounds play during practice. I was on the ball and we were running a full court, hail-mary type play where my teammate tried to throw a full court pass. I jumped up to try to get a hand on it and he drilled be right in the bottom of my ribs. If I recall correctly, I broke the bottom set and had detached tendons. Every breath or midsection movement killed me for about three days. And, yes, my teammate felt terrible.

[CrescentMoonie]

The "pass" starts before the teammate, who is double teamed and whose cut is maybe 3 lazy steps, begins to move. It's clearly done on purpose and should result in a suspension.

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

If you've played sports, you experience opponents getting hurt. [...]but you still feel like shit if you see another kid get hit by a pitch in the head or taken out/injured on a slide.

Agree to disagree.

Now to be clear. I think the ref could and should have called a tech there.
I do not think or expect the opponent to fell...anything... for the other player.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Agree to disagree.

Now to be clear. I think the ref could and should have called a tech there.
I do not think or expect the opponent to fell...anything... for the other player.

so, you don't feel one bit of remorse? at all?

edited...rereading your statement and possibly misinterpreted it as the other player and not your beliefs...if so, apologies.

[miami_fan]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Do we get a juggs gun for every court to determine whether velocity warrants a call?

Just watched the video.

Though the camera angle isn't perfect, it looks as though the inbounder has a teammate cutting relatively hard to where the pass would have gone if it hadn't been blocked by the defender's head. There's certainly reason to throw a pass with a lot of zip on it in that situation, especially if he's trying to thread the needle into the doubleteam the receiver was working against.

I see the same thing tbh. This looks like a play where the first option was the player cutting to the basket. Instead of the inbounder just tossing it back to the fourth option at the half court line as everyone else was guarded, it looks like he tried to gun it in there. His team probably practiced that play 100 times. At least 95 of those just got zipped into the primary cutter who beat his man for a layup. All of a sudden, the opposition doubled the cutter and voila, the inbounder has no idea what to do. The inbounder is not even considering either of the corner options that were in the camera shot on the play. Based on that clip, I am going to wildly assume that he is just not a good HS basketball player who's had no idea what to do when the primary option was taken away and decided to try to force the ball to the first option anyway.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Swaggs

If you've played sports, you experience opponents getting hurt. I was really aggressive when I played baseball, but you still feel like shit if you see another kid get hit by a pitch in the head or taken out/injured on a slide.

I'd say that's situational.

]The inbounding player's apparent reaction, having no empathy or remorse for doing something like that, is fairly scary to me (unless he didn't realize, which seems unlikely in the situation).

The guy being in the way of the pass isn't the inbounder's fault. He's staying in the game, heads straight to the ball, just like he should be doing. I want his mind on how to get the damned ball in bounds on the next opportunity. He's not a doctor and it was a basketball not a gunshot wound.

My God people, I've seen massive blocks that hit the same spot with equal or more force ... play continues and it doesn't turn into a handwringing internet controversy.

If this was about intent that's a fair enough discussion I suppose. But good Lord, about his reaction to a (non) injury that was presumably incidental?

[MrBug708]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I'd say that's situational.



The guy being in the way of the pass isn't the inbounder's fault. He's staying in the game, heads straight to the ball, just like he should be doing. I want his mind on how to get the damned ball in bounds on the next opportunity. He's not a doctor and it was a basketball not a gunshot wound.

My God people, I've seen massive blocks that hit the same spot with equal or more force ... play continues and it doesn't turn into a handwringing internet controversy.

If this was about intent that's a fair enough discussion I suppose. But good Lord, about his reaction to a (non) injury that was presumably incidental?

You must be a huge fan of soccer

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by MrBug708

You must be a huge fan of soccer

That's different.

Clearly, those are frequently gunshot wounds

[CU Tiger]

Originally Posted by hollmt

so, you don't feel one bit of remorse? at all?

edited...rereading your statement and possibly misinterpreted it as the other player and not your beliefs...if so, apologies.

No, you had my intent right the first time.
In my experience, the truly elite at most sports have a kill or be killed ( let's not make this a war analogy...that isn't a perfect phrase..but it's the best I got at the moment)in the heat of battle.

It truly is all about defeating your enemy and seeing him crushed before you.

[Julio Riddols]

I think modern science regarding head trauma has colored our opinions on this quite a bit.

[RainMaker]

It really comes down to intent. Was he trying to make a basketball play of some sort or was it strictly to hurt the other player in a legal manner? It's up to the ref to decide.

I'd judge it the same way we judge a hit by pitch in baseball.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

I think modern science regarding head trauma has colored our opinions on this quite a bit.

I think you'd be wrong about that.

At least with regard to competitors.

[Butter]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Do we get a juggs gun for every court to determine whether velocity warrants a call?

Are you really being that intentionally obtuse? No, you don't have to get a fucking Jugs gun. I would like to think people can use common sense but I know that a lot of people lack in that area.

Just watched the video.

Though the camera angle isn't perfect, it looks as though the inbounder has a teammate cutting relatively hard to where the pass would have gone if it hadn't been blocked by the defender's head. There's certainly reason to throw a pass with a lot of zip on it in that situation, especially if he's trying to thread the needle into the doubleteam the receiver was working against.

Two things:

1. The defender wasn't moving his head around. He was basically standing still. The pass comes on a downward trajectory right into the middle of his face. It's not like it skimmed off the top of his head. If he was throwing a pass, it would've been right at that guy's shins, at about 10 feet away. It was a supremely shitty pass, you could suspend him just for crimes against basketball.

2. He has zero reaction to the kid in front of him crumpling to the ground. If we're trying to judge intent, I would say that the in-bounder has zero reaction to beaning the shit out of that kid, because that's what he was trying to do.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Butter

Are you really being that intentionally obtuse?

No,I'm being completely serious. If you're going to mention velocity as a factor then you have to be able to quantify it.

Think of it like this, those youth leagues that are limited by weight. It's a 75 pound weight limit and then you weigh the kid. It's not a "we think you're too fat" limit.

If he was throwing a pass, it would've been right at that guy's shins, at about 10 feet away. It was a supremely shitty pass, you could suspend him just for crimes against basketball.

Not with where he appears to be throwing it. I think the inbounder is so locked in on the target that he's not even seeing his defender as the obstacle here, he's seeing the problem as the doubleteam. It's a Favre pass, for sure, but it's a legit basketball play in the context we're shown.

And that's without us knowing whether, just for example, five low passes like you suggest had been kicked balls or turnovers earlier. Or if the intended recipient has trouble with a low ball. Or if the inbounder is simply more confident in zipping one in than with trying to finesse a pass into the double team.

If we're trying to judge intent, I would say that the in-bounder has zero reaction to beaning the shit out of that kid, because that's what he was trying to do.

Frankly, you're lucky he didn't laugh. Cause this was far closer to being mildly amusing than to being worthy of angst.

[CU Tiger]

Reading this thread has me seriously questioning my own sociopathic tendencies, or over competitive nature.

For example I remember an opponent breaking his leg in a high school football game. Gruesome compound fracture. Late in a close game. I ended up with blood on my jersey as did several folks. This was early 90s AIDS terror days. We were all whisked off the field and had our jerseys CUT OFF. Then were pulling jerseys off back ups and relaying new numbers to the press box. Me and one other guy missed a couple plays because we didnt have the number switch completed in time. I, to this day, remember thinking if not saying out loud, "if we lose this game because me and Hud arent in there I'm going to find the kid and break his other leg." The emotion of remorse or sorrow never even crossed my mind. Frankly I'm sort of surprised to hear that anyone competing at the high school level or above would feel that for an opponent DURING the game. Little league is different I get it. After the game is different. I get that. But in the heat of the moment....remorse for the enemy...incomprehensible to me.

[hollmt]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

No, you had my intent right the first time.
In my experience, the truly elite at most sports have a kill or be killed ( let's not make this a war analogy...that isn't a perfect phrase..but it's the best I got at the moment)in the heat of battle.

It truly is all about defeating your enemy and seeing him crushed before you.

Ok, and I get that. I think sports is very emotional though. What I mean is it is played with emotion, not emotional boohoo cry baby antics. I've done things in sports where I went after someone and claimed it was an accident, so I get that. I'm not necessarily proud of it either and it was done in my younger days. I was actually ejected from a freshman bball game for throwing a ball at a kid after a missed layup. I just threw it AT him, not at his face and I was tossed. Purely at that time an emotional response from me, but because my emotion got the best of me, I could have hurt the kid had the ball been thrown at his face instead.

To be fair though (and this isn't honestly meant to be a tit for tat internet tough guy battle ), if you are not going to feel bad about throwing a ball in my face, once I get up and recover from a possible busted lip, broken nose or just outright stinging pain, do not expect me to feel bad when on the next opportunity i 'unintentionally' knock you the hell out in whatever way I can

[Butter]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

No,I'm being completely serious. If you're going to mention velocity as a factor then you have to be able to quantify it.

I don't think you have to quantify it at all. It's a judgment call. Velocity is part of the overall picture, including where did he throw it, intent, etc.

Frankly, you're lucky he didn't laugh. Cause this was far closer to being mildly amusing than to being worthy of angst.

I don't think the kid is going to have lifelong repercussions or anything like that, so I think the level of "angst" is probably a bit much. But is that worth a technical foul? Probably. Ejection? Maybe. Suspension? Probably not.

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by CrescentMoonie

The "pass" starts before the teammate, who is double teamed and whose cut is maybe 3 lazy steps, begins to move. It's clearly done on purpose and should result in a suspension.

It looks to me like the pass was intended for the screener who should be wide open at the top of the key.

[Ben E Lou]

I'm still stuck on "it's perfectly fine to throw it off of his leg but it's not ok to throw it off of his face," (yeah, assuming it wasn't just a case of trying to force a pass that wasn't there.) In football, when we decide that the head is of concern, we make a specific rule that you can't hit the head.

[revrew]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I'm still stuck on "it's perfectly fine to throw it off of his leg but it's not ok to throw it off of his face," (yeah, assuming it wasn't just a case of trying to force a pass that wasn't there.) In football, when we decide that the head is of concern, we make a specific rule that you can't hit the head.

I don't think we can perfectly compare football, a contact sport, to basketball, a supposedly non-contact sport.

Furthermore, basketball already has rules in place (i.e. the "flagrant," or what used to be called "intentional," foul) giving officials the leniency to judge intent or severity of the offense. And if it's a technical foul (because it is) to kick the ball or slam the ball into the floor in a fit of rage, then it can certainly be a technical foul to slam same ball into an opponent.

But it is the official's discretion and judgment. And especially at the student level, I support players being compelled to abide by the discretion and judgment of the established authorities of the game. I think it's a good life lesson in humility and civility.

(Full disclosure: I grew up the son of a state Hall-of-fame basketball official, so I may have some bias toward the officials)

[Balldog]

If it wasn't deliberately thrown at his face wouldn't you show some concern about throwing the ball right into his face? The fact that he just went over and picked up the ball tells me it wasn't intended for any other target.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Drake]

My only objection to a play like that is the manipulation of protection by the officials.

That is, let's assume it's a legal play. If you pull that shit on the playground or in a pick-up game, if you make that play off a guy's face, you'd also better be ready to defend yourself, because he's probably going to get up and beat your ass.

Transfer it to a gym with an official who's going to throw the guy out if he throws the punch, and you're just being a jerk. That's why you throw at the legs, because otherwise you're classing yourself in the "dish it out but can't take it" category.

(For the record, I've accepted over the last 20 years that bouncing the inbounds off another player's legs is legal. It always felt like a shit strategy to me when I first started seeing it on the playground in the '80s. I will neither confirm nor deny that one or more smartass kid in my neighborhood may have gotten his ass kicked over unsportsmanlike conduct, but I will say that most of the kids we played with came to understand that cheap plays came with consequences, since hard screens are also completely legal, and calling your own fouls is a negotiation in the absence of paid officials.)

[VPI97]

Originally Posted by Balldog

If it wasn't deliberately thrown at his face wouldn't you show some concern about throwing the ball right into his face? The fact that he just went over and picked up the ball tells me it wasn't intended for any other target.

Not really...I see this reaction all the time at my son's games (9th grade). If someone does something like this unintentionally, a typical reaction is to continue as normal unless a coach yells to to take a knee or something...no one at a high school age is going to show concern about the opposition, to be honest. However, If this was done intentionally, I would expect the immediate reaction to be:
- Looking around to see if he was in trouble from the referee/anyone else
- Looking around to see if there was any retaliation coming from teammates
- Hand covering their mouth to suppress a smirk

I think it's likely that the kid barely even noticed that the defender took one off the dome. He was probably too focused on making the pass to notice where it hit the inbounds defender. That's what they're taught to do when being the inbounder...ignore the distraction from the guy guarding you and only focus on your teammates.

[Butter]

I poked around for about 3 minutes on the internet to see if anything really came of this... near as I can tell, nothing really has.

But the high school did issue a statement at least a day after the game that said:

"This was an unfortunate incident in the midst of a hard-fought game. The players directly involved met and shook hands after the game with no further incident. While no violation or warning was issued by the referee on the scene at the time, the matter is being reviewed and dealt with at the team level."

That statement being from the school of the thrower makes me think that it was not an accident, or I would imagine it would've referenced it being some kind of accident.

[hollmt]

OK, I need confirmation on something from a few of you.

Are we not showing concern/remorse during the heat of battle/the game as the incident occurs or are we not showing concern/remorse after the fact of you realizing you injured somebody?

The 2 things are not the same. I can understand completely not showing concern/remorse at the time of the incident because you are locked in and perhaps emotionally invested. I cannot understand not showing concern/remorse after the fact and things have settled down and you realize you just broke a kids leg/arm/nose/neck etc.

I'm well past worrying about if this kid intentionally or unintentionally threw the ball at that kid's face. I'm also a very pro tough love athlete in regards to tough it out and play physical as/if necessary. But I also give a shit for the well-being of my opponent if something bad happens.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by CU Tiger

Reading this thread has me seriously questioning my own sociopathic tendencies, or over competitive nature.

For example I remember an opponent breaking his leg in a high school football game. Gruesome compound fracture. Late in a close game. I ended up with blood on my jersey as did several folks. This was early 90s AIDS terror days. We were all whisked off the field and had our jerseys CUT OFF. Then were pulling jerseys off back ups and relaying new numbers to the press box. Me and one other guy missed a couple plays because we didnt have the number switch completed in time. I, to this day, remember thinking if not saying out loud, "if we lose this game because me and Hud arent in there I'm going to find the kid and break his other leg." The emotion of remorse or sorrow never even crossed my mind. Frankly I'm sort of surprised to hear that anyone competing at the high school level or above would feel that for an opponent DURING the game. Little league is different I get it. After the game is different. I get that. But in the heat of the moment....remorse for the enemy...incomprehensible to me.

1 - I HATE political correctness. Despise it with a passion. I think 95% of it is pure, 100% garbage.

2 - I'm as competitive as you will find. I don't care if it is bowling or basketball or some board game I'm playing with family, I hate losing.

3 - Despite those two things, I've never referred to the team I'm against as "my enemy" or not cared about a player who was injured on the other team. I'm diving for a loose ball and my elbow hits a guys throat by mistake, I'm helping him up and letting him know there was no intent.

I want to beat that guy. I want MY team to be on top when the game is over. And if a guy breaks a bone, once the clock starts up again, I'm damned well going to focus on the game and try to achieve the goal of winning.

But I have NEVER viewed sports as some war movie where the other team is the "enemy" and I don't give a crap what happens to them. Even rivalry games against people I despised (because of which house their parents bought when they were kids that made me hate them irrationally) I never, ever avoided helping someone up or giving a damn about that other guy.

We are all wired differently. I'm not putting you or anyone with that mentality down. But I could never have thrown a ball into someone's face like that and casually walked toward the ball without at least saying "sorry, was trying for that cutter" or "are you ok?" That attitude is foreign to me.

[Julio Riddols]

Yeah, I wouldn't go ball-to-face myself.. I kind of like when the odds are against me, I feel like I play best in those situations.. So trying to find a way to legally get the ball in bounds would be my only concern because I think I am capable of defeating whatever defense is trying to stop me.. But in desperation, if I did throw it off of the guy it would certainly have been aimed at the legs, simply because there isn't any reason for a face shot.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by VPI97

However, If this was done intentionally, I would expect the immediate reaction to be:
- Looking around to see if he was in trouble from the referee/anyone else
- Looking around to see if there was any retaliation coming from teammates
- Hand covering their mouth to suppress a smirk

Wait, what's this? Common sense in an FOFC thread? I'm gonna need to sit down for a minute, I'm feeling a little faint.

I mean, I know it happens but it's so unexpected once the waaahmbulances get rolling & all.

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Drake

(For the record, I've accepted over the last 20 years that bouncing the inbounds off another player's legs is legal. It always felt like a shit strategy to me when I first started seeing it on the playground in the '80s.

Wait, who's pressuring inbounds passes at the playground? We'd have people mad at us if we threw a 2-3 zone out, let alone full court pressure.

[Drake]

You didn't grow up in Indiana, I take it?