View Single Post
  #5 (permalink)  
Old Tue Sep 20, 2016, 08:15pm
BigCat BigCat is offline
Official Forum Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Illinois
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freddy View Post
If the removal of the word "legally" in rule 4-42-5a, then the casebook play you cite is now incorrect: "Since the alternating-possession throw-in had not been contacted legally, the throw-in has not ended..." The COMMENT there seems correct, but not the wording of the RULING.

I do agree that whether the word "legally" appears in 4-42-5a or not, the wording of rule 6-4-2 means that it really doesn't make any difference--illegal contact by the defense won't mean the throwing team loses the AP arrow and illegal contact by the throwing team means they will. Right?
Correct. If the throwin team violates the arrow is changed. If the defense violates the arrow stays and the next throwin is for the defensive violation.
Reply With Quote