|
Why?
All right those of you who serve on various rules committees, my crew is looking at the following casebook play because we had the comment come up in a game Friday night. My question is why they would make this situation different for a foul as opposed to a violation. I understand with the new editorial change that a throw in doesn't end until the ball is legally touched or if A commits a violation, but why are they possibly not penalized (ie. losing the arrow) A fouls? To me this change just hasn't been explained well in my area and leads to some goofy situations that could easily be screwed up. BTW, we did get it right.
6.4.5 SITUATION A: Team A is awarded the ball for a throw-in under the alternating procedure. A1 commits a
violation. RULING: B’s ball for a throw-in because of the violation. In addition, the possession arrow is reversed and is
pointed towards B’s basket. Team B will have the next throw-in opportunity under the alternating procedure. Team A has
lost its opportunity by virtue of the violation. A violation by Team A during an alternating-possession throw-ins is the only
way a team loses its turn under the procedure. COMMENT: If a foul by either team occurs before an alternating possession
throw-in ends, the foul is penalized as required and play continues as it normally would, but the possession
arrow is not reversed. The same team will still have the arrow for the next alternating-possession throw-in. The arrow is
reversed when an alternating-possession throw-in ends. (6-4-4)
|