Is this shot legal?

[Roy Hobbs]

Kobe's behind the backboard shot is getting a lot of hype, and yes, it was a good shot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1FLPquyyuk8&feature=player_embedded

The question is, was it legal?  Coincidentally enough, two Celtics have pulled off similar feats, Larry Bird and Rajon Rondo. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebx61XuFGX8&feature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6epUzbwZOaU&feature=player_embedded

The rule states:

Rule No. 8, Section II. b: Any ball that rebounds or passes directly behind the backboard, in either direction, from any point is considered out-of-bounds.

Rondo's shot was allowed; Bird's shot was disallowed under a previous rule. 

Here was the explanation the NBA officials gave at the time (along with the Globe's spin):

After taking a look at the shot and determining that it was on the up-and-up, NBA vice president of referee operations Joe Borgia took a couple minutes to explain the rule to the Globe yesterday.

"Think of the basketball backboard as a long tunnel that goes straight back," Borgia said. "If the ball goes through that tunnel, it's a violation. If you looked at Rondo's shot, it was an arching shot up and over the backboard. It never passes through the tunnel."

The comparisons between Rondo's shot and the shot Larry Bird hit in a 1986 preseason game against Houston were instant. The difference, of course, is that Rondo's counted and Larry Legend's was waived off.

Looking at them both though, you can sort of see what Borgia's talking about. Rondo took his shot from outside of the lane, faded away and essentially avoided the backboard altogether. Bird is deep in the paint, literally behind the backboard, and treats it like an obstacle, sort of like those McDonald's commercials. The shot he puts up almost makes it look like he's shooting into a silo, or as Borgia put it, a tunnel.

Didn't Kobe's shot go directly over the backboard?  Did the officials get this one wrong?  If so, why is this being used in officially-sponsored NBA commercials?

Is the rule really so narrow that it means literally directly behind the basket, rather than off to the side at all?

Either way, it's a good shot, although it's probably over-hyped since it's been done multiple times before.

[Bahku]

Saw the hype about it this morning, too, and was thinking the same thing ... from a strict interpretation of the rule, I don't see any way this can be legal ... but I'm sure they'll overlook it and make an exception for Kobe's sake, as usual. I don't believe it was allowed in Bird's case, and Rondo's was much nearer to the area of discussion.

[ma11l]

A.) There is not way that shot should've counted.  It clearly went directly over the backboard.

B.) I think that shot is overrated.  It really isn't that hard of a shot.  Rondo should probably practice from back there so he can get some more arc to his jumper.

[fairweatherfan]

Yeah, the shot's illegal - it doesn't even take a strict interpretation to say so, ball starts behind the backboard, ball goes directly over the top of the backboard, violation. 

Still a nice shot though.

[Bahku]

Yeah, the shot's illegal - it doesn't even take a strict interpretation to say so, ball starts behind the backboard, ball goes directly over the top of the backboard, violation. 

Still a nice shot though.

Sure it does ... a "strict interpretation" means the definition of the rule is clearly stated ... without which there is no rule, and no violation.

[liam]

When Bird did it many years ago it was not a legal shot. But the rules get looser each year. If you took steps you could stop pump fake and then jump and shoot. ( Shaq, etc...) The rules and the refs are a mess.

[pearljammer10]

Refs botched this one. That is an illegal shot and should not have counted but since its Kobe Bryant anything goes. Going over the top plane of the backboard like that is definitely out of bounds. I cant believe nothing was said or a whistle wasn't blown...

With that said, I feel that Rondo's shot was legal because of the explanation given. Kobe was directly behind the backboard. That's not a legal shot.

[the_Bird]

Can someone explain to me the rationale for this even being a rule?  I just don't get WHY a shot shouldn't count, if the player is in-bounds when he shoots it.  Why does this rule even exist?

[kozlodoev]

Can someone explain to me the rationale for this even being a rule?  I just don't get WHY a shot shouldn't count, if the player is in-bounds when he shoots it.  Why does this rule even exist?

The area behind the backboard is (or typically can be) non-standard, depending on how the basket is attached. Therefore a shot that can be easily made on one court can be missed on another. So it makes sense that for the sake of uniformity you shouldn't be able to shoot from behind the board.

That's my best guess, anyhow.

[ManUp]

That rule needs to be changed. Out of bounds should be restricted to the ball touch behind the back board, Shot clock, ouside of the lines, etc. If a player can make that shot he deserves the points for it.