Can someone explain the 5 second in-bounds rule to me? I always understood the in-bounding team had 5 seconds from the time they take possession of the ball out of bound, to pass the ball in bounds to a teammate or it was a violation... Then 10 seconds to get the ball cross the half court line.

Yet I know I've seen players for instance, Nova's Brunson tonight with 35 seconds left) watch an in-bounds pass roll up the court and well over 5 seconds expire before a teammate picks up the ball -- often at the end of a half or quarter... I don't understand why the 5 second violation is not called.

TIA !

I just texted a coach with this same question. I know at one time, the ball had to be touched inbounds in 5 sec.

It is 5 seconds for the in-bounder to release the ball throwing it in. There is no time limit associated with the receiver of the in-bound pass touching or receiving it. The 5 second time limit is only for the person throwing it in to release the ball.

And the 10 second back court count only starts when the receiver of the pass touches it. So, there is a untimed period with no time limit counts associated with it before the receiver of the pass touches it and takes possession.

Maybe it needs to leave the inbounder's hand infivr seconds.

It's 5 seconds to release the ball from the player inbounding the ball. That's why you see plays like the one Brunson made and you also will see players throw it to the backcourt to their own player when underneath their own goal.

Mikesyracuse1

Thx...must have changed. It was different years ago.

Ok, that makes sense.... I could swear in the 1970's your in bounds teammate had to touch the ball within the 5 seconds. Either the rule was changed or I'm mis-remembering.
Thanks for the correct answers

back when people thought disco was a good idea and made dunking illegal.

Whaler said:

---

Ok, that makes sense.... I could swear in the 1970's your in bounds teammate had to touch the ball within the 5 seconds. Either the rule was changed or I'm mis-remembering.
Thanks for the correct answers

---

It was! Then the NCAA as well as the National Federation(High School) changed it from "the 5-seconds release from out-of-bounds and touch in-bounds" to simply a "5 seconds release from out-of-bounds."

When inbounded, the 10-second backcourt count, as well as shot-clock, will not start until the ball is touched by an inbounds player! That's why the trail official will not drop his hand to start the backcourt count until such time that it is touched by an inbounds teammate!

I actually didn't know that the backcourt count doesn't start until it's touched. I knew the shot clock (and when the game clock is stopped, the game clock) doesn't start until someone touches it, but I guess I never thought about the ten second count not starting either.

So if we're down late a strategy could be to inbound but don't touch the ball then form a human barrier around the ball forcing the opponent to either foul to put us on the line or stall out the game indefinitely until the other team leaves and forfeits

EliteZags said:

---

So if we're down late a strategy could be to inbound but don't touch the ball then form a human barrier around the ball forcing the opponent to either foul to put us on the line or stall out the game indefinitely until the other team leaves and forfeits

---

Brilliant

The yellboys would love this kind of "huddle up" grab-ass. CT attendance would skyrocket.

^
You mean like 90% of us who graduated before '74 or so. Get over your pompous anti-whatever self.

With the enhanced focus on analytics-I have noticed underdog/leading teams make more of a point to take their time before grabbing the ball for inbounds after a made basket. Refs give a bit a bit of a grace period to grab the ball before doing starting a count...During this time, the clock is running but the shot clock is not. It seems teams kill off an extra 5 or seconds per possession doing this.

I don't think "we should let the clock run as much as possible" is exactly advanced analytics, but teams have been doing that for years.

Sure it is-- being more strategic how you run the clock relates to analytics. There was an article published recently about this trend in college basketball-- more teams taking advantage of if it (can't find it at the moment). But if you want to argue semantics, fine.

I do agree we're seeing more of it, but even my high school coach like 15 years ago would tell our team if we were ahead and playing a good opponent not to pick up the ball, either make the ref hand it to you or wait for the ref to tell you to pick it up.

I'm just saying it's not exactly revolutionary.

Since this is a rules thread, one rule I'd like to see changed that isn't as extreme as my "teams should be able to decline free throws" thing is I'd like to see them change the rules of when teams can call a timeout. I hate that coaches can call a timeout after their team makes a basket. I think once the ball goes through the hoop you shouldn't be able to call a timeout.

bobinator said:

---

I do agree we're seeing more of it, but even my high school coach like 15 years ago would tell our team if we were ahead and playing a good opponent not to pick up the ball, either make the ref hand it to you or wait for the ref to tell you to pick it up.

I'm just saying it's not exactly revolutionary.

Since this is a rules thread, one rule I'd like to see changed that isn't as extreme as my "teams should be able to decline free throws" thing is I'd like to see them change the rules of when teams can call a timeout. I hate that coaches can call a timeout after their team makes a basket. I think once the ball goes through the hoop you shouldn't be able to call a timeout.

---

When I first started coaching under FIBA rules, calling a timeout only on dead balls was the hardest adjustment for me as a coach. Very hard to stop momentum.

I actually like being able to call a timeout after made baskets.

Mikesyracuse1

Bob - how would your ft change work?
Just the option to take the ball out from the sideline after any foul that would normally result in FTs? Would you reset the shot clock all the way, partially, or not at all?
If you were a coach (or were criticizing an aggie coach) what level FT shooter would you decline the option?
Always for a RW/deandre level guy?
Situationally for a mid 60s guy like tyler?

mikesyracuse1 said:

---

I actually like being able to call a timeout after made baskets.

---

Yeah, but you're a coach. I get why coaches like it.

I don't like it though. I think once you've made a basket your possession is over. I actually liked the change that coaches couldn't call timeout at all in live ball situations.

Basically, I'm all for rules changes that make the players have to be smarter basketball players. I don't like how often a coach can bail out his team in college basketball. That's part of why I think there are entirely too many timeouts, coaches basically take turns drawing up set plays in the closing minutes of a lot of games.

expresswrittenconsent said:

---

Bob - how would your ft change work?
Just the option to take the ball out from the sideline after any foul that would normally result in FTs? Would you reset the shot clock all the way, partially, or not at all?
If you were a coach (or were criticizing an aggie coach) what level FT shooter would you decline the option?
Always for a RW/deandre level guy?
Situationally for a mid 60s guy like tyler?

---

Yeah, you could decline the free throws and take the ball out from the sideline. I'd have to probably experiment to figure out how the shot clock would work. My initial thought is that it would work just like it does now when a team isn't in the bonus.

There are a lot of aspects of it that coaches would have to crunch the numbers on as far as when they should shoot them versus decline them.

I've talked about this before, but to me it's just a fundamental insanity of basketball that the defense can choose to put a specific person on the offensive team at the free throw line.

But even bigger than that is it's absolutely crazy to me that the defense can limit how many points the offense can attempt to score. If I'm down three points, for example, the defensive team shouldn't be able to intentionally break the rules and limit me to two points.

I also know that this isn't a popular idea. I recognize that to many people, 'making your free throws' is a fundamental part of basketball, so my proposal of "what if it wasn't" is a fundamental shift in the sport.

I think soon we will see some of the rules they tried in the NIT this year adopted for the men's game. Probably the three point line moved back and the change to 10 minute quarters. I'm not sure if they'll widen the lane or not. The games in the nit were definitely quicker and less free throws as the bonus resets each quarter and there's no 1-1 on the bonus. All 2 shots.

Mikesyracuse1

Yeah, that would be a welcome change. Like I've said on here, I used to be against those changes but I watched a few women's games this year and there's no doubt the game feels like it flows better.