6-4-5
 

A friend asked me about what should happen to the possession arrow when Team A is called for a five second violation during an AP throw in. So I got to explaining the rule...

In 6-4-5, it says that if Team A fouls during an AP throw in, they will not lose the possession arrow. Though if they violate (five seconds, etc), they will lose the arrow.

Why the difference?

The difference is simple. They want the arrow to change on a violation or lose the arrow on a violation and not a foul. Think of it this way, a foul could have further penalty to them like shooting FTs or maybe even shoot FTs and getting the ball to the other team. A violation you only lose the ball, that is why I believe there is the difference.

Peace

Throw-in ends when throw-in team violates. AP arrow switches when AP throw-in ends.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

Sure. I get that.

This seems like it should be a (in very technical terms, obviously) you-had-your-chance kind of a situation.

One of the biggest mistakes officials try to make is to justify a rule based on another rule. It just is the way it is. I am sure it is similar to what I stated and what BNR stated. The throw-in does not end by a foul and a foul has other penalties. Just know the difference and apply the rule properly. Not much you can do at this point. Trying to justify the rest is going to confuse you more.

Peace

What Jrut said is important. For starters just make sure you know the rules, which it sounds like you're doing a good job of.

Checking out the history of rule changes can also help you understand why some rules may seem weird now. Changing rules can have confusing impacts on officials who only read one years rule book. Example: Team control now on throw-ins.

Edmund Burke ???
 

As a retired middle school science teacher, I'm a big fan of trying to understand the history of a rule to help one to better understand it, but be careful. Sometimes one can be confused by the many changes that take place for some rules. I had a jumper illegally catch the jump ball a few weeks ago and reverted back to the old rule (lose ball and lose arrow) in place when the NFHS first went to the possession arrow. Embarrassing? You bet.

Those who don't know history are destined to repeat it. (Edmund Burke)

I bet that Edmund Burke never officiated a basketball game.

Right...I know the rule, and have no problem officiating it as such.

You bring up the history of rules changes. I've only been doing high school ball since 2009. Was this a rule change at some point?

Young Guns ...
 

I have parts of my officiating uniform older than that.

Team control on a throw-in made the rules a bit confusing.

I remember that one. But that has nothing to do with the rule in question.

I wouldn't say nothing. It made fouls slightly closer to violations. Before fouls counted toward the bonus AND the potential to shoot FTs. Now it's just counted toward the bonus.

I never met the person who wrote the rules so I can't tell you why. I just make sure I enforce it correctly every time.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

But that has nothing to do with his question about the arrow not changing on a foul.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

It may have everything to do with it and why they initially decided to not swap the arrow on a foul. We don't know, well, I don't know, I've never read anything to prove or disprove what I'd imagine to be their thinking.

Foul interrupts your inbounds opportunity before you have a chance to complete it or have.

Violation ends your opportunity and thus completes it.

The rule makers have determined, and most here agree with the logic, that the AP should entitle a team to a complete throw in rather than just an opportunity for a throw in.

I personally think it would be simpler and make more sense to switch the arrow as soon as the ball is at the disposal of the throw in team. To me, the arrow has done its job, and anything that happens during that throw in is the direct result of the AP arrow.

I'm in the minority, though.

Right off hand I can't see how this would be a problem.

Primarily, there's really no reason for the change other than added simplicity. The way it's done now doesn't really create any problems. It's just not how I'd do it.

Hey, I'm agreeing with you. Don't talk me out of it :)

yeah, I realized that.

Never mind. :)

Some would see it as a problem and others wouldn't. I don't really mind either way, but I think changing it gives the defense more of an advantage. Now after a jump ball you can be more physical trying to stop the other teams' star player(s) from catching the ball. At least now if you commit the foul as the defense you'll get the next AP arrow. One example.

I doubt teams really strategize whether or not to foul based on how it affects the arrow: but again, in my view, the arrow would still have done its job by giving A the throw in that B used to foul. If B is going to foul here, I doubt they're being deterred by the fact that the arrow isn't going to change if they do. Hell, I doubt they even realize that's the case now.

Fair enough, I'll use one that's a bit more practical.

5 seconds left in the 4th and A is ahead by 1 and there has just been a jump ball in favor of A. B now definitely wants to foul before the ball is in-bounded to make sure the clock never starts. B3 holds A3 trying to keep them from getting the ball. A3 shoots a 1&1 and misses. A2 and B2 now have a jump ball. Because of the AP arrow change B now gets the ball instead of A.

I'm not sure what to make of plays like this, but it would be a game changing rule(rarely).

Oh, my change would definitely affect a few different scenarios.

AP throw in, A reaches the ball across the OOB plane and B1 grabs it and ties it up. Currently, A gets a new AP throw in. Under my change, B would get an AP throw in.

Any foul by either team would not result in the arrow staying put; that would be a change.

Prevent the Never Ending Game
 

If the AP arrow did not switch on a 5-sec violation...

A1 & B1 tie up the ball, the arrow points towards team A. However, there are only .4 seconds left in the half, and not much of a chance to score so team A takes the violation, in an attempt to get the ball to start 2H (a much more valuable possession). Team B now says, wow, what a great, innovative idea. So they take that same 5 second violation.... You will now be doing this game, and calling 5 second violations for the rest of your life!

No, because Team B's throw-in is not an AP throw-in. So they gain nothing by committing a 5-second violation.

Yep. there may be issues that could arise, but this would not be one.