I have to say injecting views and opinions without basing decisions on rules can lead to possible loss of games. JMHO.
I won't inject my opinion on how I rule this play if I ever have it happen during one of my games. I can guarantee that I will never miss this call
All I'm saying is that this interpretation doesn't seem right to me.
I do not see where the ball touched another player in the situation It touched B1's foot.
The ruling entitles the team to a proper throw-in due to a held ball. Switching the arrow when the ball is kicked penalizes the team as they lose the next held ball situation. Team A did get to throw the ball in after the original held ball. They get to try another throw in as a result of the kick. Had there been no kick, the arrow would have switched to Team B for the next held ball/ROP or whatever. But since there was a kick, Team A got to try to throw in again PLUS retains the arrow for the next AP situation. Just doesn't seem right. But I won't miss it