Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rick Durkee
While looking for another rule I found 6-4-3g. 6-4-3, when compbined with part "g," says, "Alternating-possession throw-ins shall be from the out of bounds spot nearest to where the ball was located. An alternating-possession throw-in shall result when:...Simultaneous floor or free throw violations occur."
This would solve the problem from the original post, but it seems to contradict the language of 9-1 Penalties 3 and 4. Is it indeed a contradiction, or am I missing something? If it is a contradiction, is there some way to resolve it?
|
Nice work, Rick.
It seems that there is a contradiction in the two rules and that the NFHS needs to address this by changing one of them.
In the meantime, I would suggest that you forget everything that I wrote above and go with the AP rule in the book. I say this because the books do not currently provide a method to determine where a simultaneous violation occurred. So award the throw-in to the team entitled to such by the AP arrow from the intersection of the end line and one of the FT lane lines, since the ball was in the FT semi-circle.