6-4-5

[bas2456]

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?

[JRutledge]

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

[Raymond]

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

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

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.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by bas2456

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

[Dad]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

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.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Dad

Checking out the history of rule changes can also help you understand why some rules may seem weird now.

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.

[bas2456]

Originally Posted by Dad

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.

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?

[Raymond]

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

[Adam]

Originally Posted by bas2456

Sure. I get that.

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

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.

[Hartsy]

Originally Posted by Adam

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.

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

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Hartsy

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.

[Dad]

Originally Posted by Hartsy

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

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.