Quote:
Originally Posted by Raymond
They have a situation, then proper ruling.
|
It's not the proper ruling. Once throw-in at the spot nearest the spot of the intentional foul is completed, as stated in the original situation, that mistake can't be fixed. There is no other legal way of starting the fourth period. There are no do-overs. Sometimes mistakes, or errors, can be legally fixed, but not this one.
The original ruling states that the fourth quarter begins with a throw-in by Team B, which has the possession arrow. That's what should have happened, but it can't happen based on the original situation. It can't be legally fixed.
Once that mistake occurs there is no way that Team B legally gets to ll
BillyMac's SITUATION 3: A1, who is dribbling the ball, is intentionally fouled as the signal to end the third quarter sounds. The official administers the free throws as a part of the third quarter and starts the fourth quarter by erroneously awarding the ball to Team A at a throw-in at the spot nearest the spot of the intentional foul. Team B has the possession arrow. Team A completes the erroneous throwin. RULING: The official correctly administered the free throws as a part of the third quarter. However, Team A should not have gotten the penalty benefit of starting the fourth quarter with the ball at the throw-in at the spot nearest the spot of the intentional foul because the quarter ended. No penalty or part of a penalty should be carried over to the next quarter or extra period except when a correctable error is involved. This is not a correctable error. When an official administers a throw-in to the wrong team, the mistake must be rectified before the throw-in ends.
My "situation" above is worded exactly the same as the original, the only difference being the added word "erroneously".
Is my "ruling" wrong? Is it not too late to fix? Is there now any legal way for Team B to get the ball to start the fourth period at the division line opposite the table?
The original ruling stated "the fourth quarter should begin with a throw-in by Team B, which has the possession arrow". It would make more sense if it said "the fourth quarter should
have begun with a throw-in by Team B, which has the possession arrow"
Where in the original ruling does it say "too late to fix, play on after the Team A throw-in at the spot nearest the spot of the intentional foul is completed"?
Now that would be a correct ruling for this situation.
But it doesn't say that. Just some confusing, unclear gibberish that implies that Team B will start the fourth period at the division line opposite the table.