Double Foul During AP Throw-in

[bob jenkins]

Is this the correct ruling?

A4 is holding the ball for an A-P throw-in. Prior to releasing the ball, A2 and B1 are called for a double foul. How is play resumed and how is the A-P arrow affected?

Answer: A double foul results in no free throws and play is resumed at the point of interruption, which in this case is the throw-in to team A. When a foul is committed during an alternating-possession throw-in, it does not cause the alternating-possession throw-in to end and does not cause the team to lose the possession arrow. Therefore, team A shall retain the alternating-possession arrow after the ensuing throw-in ends.
(NFHS 4-36-2b, 4-42-5, 6-4-4, 6-4-5).

[ODog]

Disagree. The point of interruption IS the AP throw-in, so you just resume with Team A's AP throw-in.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

Is this the correct ruling?

A4 is holding the ball for an A-P throw-in. Prior to releasing the ball, A2 and B1 are called for a double foul. How is play resumed and how is the A-P arrow affected?

Answer: A double foul results in no free throws and play is resumed at the point of interruption, which in this case is the throw-in to team A. When a foul is committed during an alternating-possession throw-in, it does not cause the alternating-possession throw-in to end and does not cause the team to lose the possession arrow. Therefore, team A shall retain the alternating-possession arrow after the ensuing throw-in ends.
(NFHS 4-36-2b, 4-42-5, 6-4-4, 6-4-5).

Hell no!!!!!! The POI is the throw-in, but it's still an AP throw-in.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Hell no!!!!!! The POI is the throw-in, but it's still an AP throw-in.

I will resume the AP throw-in.

[BigCat]

I can think of many reasons why i think its wrong. The only thing i can think of to support it is that there really isnt anything that says after a double foul you go back to the same type of throw in you had when the double foul was committed. If there's a double foul during the throw in after a made basket, the next throw in is On the end line but they dont get to run the end line.

I dont agree with the ruling because when we have a double foul we always try to keep the status quo. Report both fouls and pick up where we left off. This ruling goes against that. A gets this throw in and the next ap one.

Where did this come from?

[Nevadaref]

I recall reading some NFHS Casebook rulings one of the previous seasons in which AP throw-ins were a concern because of kicking violations and the addition of the POI rule. My recollection is that a double foul immediately prior to or during an AP throw-in causes the officials to invoke the POI rule and the NFHS ruling was that an AP throw-in shall be awarded to the team with arrow.

It's late and I'll check my old Casebooks tomorrow, but these plays were right in the front.

Meanwhile, consider this current Casebook ruling:
4.34.2 SITUATION:
The third quarter ends; as the teams are heading to their respective benches, team members A1 and B1 verbally taunt one another.
RULING: Double technical foul charged to A1 and B1. During the intermission between quarters, all team members are bench personnel for the purpose of penalizing unsporting behavior. Both head coaches are indirectly charged with technical fouls and lose their coaching box privileges. Play will resume at the point of interruption, which is an alternating-possession arrow throw-in, to begin the fourth quarter. (10-4-1d Penalty; 10-5-1a)

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Where did this come from?

Someone asked me the question (and he was questioning the play). I responded much as everyone here did.

I think he got it from RefMag.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

I recall reading some NFHS Casebook rulings one of the previous seasons in which AP throw-ins were a concern because of kicking violations and the addition of the POI rule. My recollection is that a double foul immediately prior to or during an AP throw-in causes the officials to invoke the POI rule and the NFHS ruling was that an AP throw-in shall be awarded to the team with arrow.

It's late and I'll check my old Casebooks tomorrow, but these plays were right in the front.

Meanwhile, consider this current Casebook ruling:
4.34.2 SITUATION:
The third quarter ends; as the teams are heading to their respective benches, team members A1 and B1 verbally taunt one another.
RULING: Double technical foul charged to A1 and B1. During the intermission between quarters, all team members are bench personnel for the purpose of penalizing unsporting behavior. Both head coaches are indirectly charged with technical fouls and lose their coaching box privileges. Play will resume at the point of interruption, which is an alternating-possession arrow throw-in, to begin the fourth quarter. (10-4-1d Penalty; 10-5-1a)

Id be interested to know if you find anything dealing with a double foul "during" the AP throw in. In the play above you've listed the ball is dead with no team in control when the double Ts occur. In that situation you have to go to the arrow to determine who gets ball next.

In this play Bob set forth, team A has control during a throw in(yes its an AP). When the double foul occurs during a throw in, the POI rule, says the throw in for the double foul will be given to the team who had the original throw in. (We are not going to the arrow as in your example above because the double foul occurred during a throw in). The POI rule doesnt say you go back to the same "type" of throw in. It's as if they are saying the second throw in is for the double foul. I think this takes the language that a foul doesnt cause a team to lose the arrow too far but i think i see what the author of the play is trying to say.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Id be interested to know if you find anything dealing with a double foul "during" the AP throw in. In the play above you've listed the ball is dead with no team in control when the double Ts occur. In that situation you have to go to the arrow to determine who gets ball next.
...

You go to the AP arrow in the above referenced situation because the POI is an AP throw-in (beginning of 4th quarter), not because the ball was dead and there was no TC. The ball is dead and there is no TC after a made basket, but we wouldn't go to the arrow in that situation, we would resume with an end line throw-in by the team that didn't score.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

You go to the AP arrow in the above referenced situation because the POI is an AP throw-in (beginning of 4th quarter), not because the ball was dead and there was no TC. The ball is dead and there is no TC after a made basket, but we wouldn't go to the arrow in that situation, we would resume with an end line throw-in by the team that didn't score.

Yes, I should have said in play Nevada cited we go to the arrow because it is the next thing to occur following the dead ball. Thx for pointing out my screw up

[crosscountry55]

So what have we decided here? Does POI supersede the premise that a foul during an AP throw-in postpones the arrow, or vice versa?

To be fair to the discussion, and without my book in front of me, I don't believe the rules (at least the NFHS rules) are clear on this, nor is there a case play or interp that I'm aware of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[OKREF]

The fouls happened during the AP throw in, I would say the POI is the AP throw in and play resumes with that. Wouldn't the arrow switch on the touching of the pass on the throw in? None of the requirements were met prior to the double fouls that would end the AP throw in.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by crosscountry55

So what have we decided here? Does POI supersede the premise that a foul during an AP throw-in postpones the arrow, or vice versa?

To be fair to the discussion, and without my book in front of me, I don't believe the rules (at least the NFHS rules) are clear on this, nor is there a case play or interp that I'm aware of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

When "they" say a foul does not change the arrow, they are referring to a single foul with a defined possession or FT penalty. In this case, it's still accurate, because you just return to the AP throw-in, and the end of that throw-in will see the arrow change.

Nothing is superceding anything here.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by OKREF

The fouls happened during the AP throw in, I would say the POI is the AP throw in and play resumes with that. Wouldn't the arrow switch on the touching of the pass on the throw in? None of the requirements were met prior to the double fouls that would end the AP throw in.

When we have a foul "during" the ap throw in it, the throw in doesn't end either. The rule says the arrow isn't lost when either team fouls. The next throw in is for the foul. arrow stays. The play Bob mentioned seems to suggest that the throw in after the double foul is... the throw in for the double foul. It is given to team A because they had the ball for the throw in at the time of the fouls. It isn't an AP throwin because fouls don't affect the arrow.

I think that ruling just grasps on to the wording that fouls don't effect the arrow and doesn't consider the nature of double fouls. We report and go back to the situation we were in just before they occurred.

I havnt ever had this happen in a game so I'm not going to worry about it. I'd go back to the AP throw in if it ever happened. Bob's play did get me thinking about it though.

[Matt S.]

I believe the arrow would stay where it's at after the throw-in for the foul is complete...here's why:

1. 6-4-5 states that "If either team fouls during an alternating-possession throw-in, it does not cause the throw-in team to lose the possession arrow."

2. If there was merely a foul by the defense, you wouldn't change the arrow after the ensuing throw-in, right?

Team A had control for a throw-in (albeit an AP throw in), there was a double foul, which, by rule, does not cause the throw-in team to lose the arrow, and the POI is a throw in by team A, since they had control at the time of the double foul.

Bob--we should've spent some time on this one at Rock Valley!!!