Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee
Lah me.....
The defensive team violates. If the rule was written the way that you want it to be instead of the way that it is ,the offensive team would lose the arrow because of that defensive violation. That's the freaking advantage that the defense would gain by committing a violation. We've been trying to tell you that for freaking days.
|
So what! That's my point that I have failed to get across. They don't get the ball!!!! Gaining the possession arrow is nothing, you want the ball. Nothing is gained from the defense, nothing is lost from the offense. We got zero here in terms of possession and the ball. I don't understand why the rulemakers feel they need to do something here or change this rule.
Now, if the ball was switched or given to the defense for the throw-in, we got a problem, but the rules of the violation takes care of that. Either way, the offense should lose the arrow. For example:
1. Successful throw-in, arrow changes
2. Defense steals throw-in, arrow changes
3. Violation offense, arrow changes
4. Violation or foul defense, no arrow change
until 1, 2, or 3 above.
Eliminating that the arrow doesn't change after #4 above is a problem. That means offense gets it again, and again. That's an unfair, unneeded imo advanatage. The violation the defense committed is now two-fold. You ensured they kept the ball (violation - which carries it's own penality) and the AP. That's like double jeopardy, convicting me for the same crime twice.
Allowing the arrow to switch simply mean the next "ALTERNATING" possession goes to the next team, not the same team. Wow, I definitely not understanding the merits behind this change.