What?....

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by BigCat

Sounds simple enough But,

Why does rule 7 say a team retains the right to run the end line if a COMMON foul or violation occurs before the throw in ends and the ensuing throw in would be on end line?

If it happens to be an intentional or flagrant foul, that throwin will occur after the FTs are taken. I guess they figured the FTs were enough of a penalty that they don't need the ability to run the endline too.

The right to still run the endline is there so that the team that committed the infraction doesn't come out with an advantage by committing the infraction.

Originally Posted by BigCat

More importantly, why doesn't it also say after a double foul team retains right to run the baseline if the ensuing throw in be on end line?

That is implied in POI....you go back to whatever was occurring at the time. If that was a throwin with the right to run the endline, that is what you do.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

If it happens to be an intentional or flagrant foul, that throwin will occur after the FTs are taken. I guess they figured the FTs were enough of a penalty that they don't need the ability to run the endline too.

The right to still run the endline is there so that the team that committed the infraction doesn't come out with an advantage by committing the infraction.

I'd venture it's more of an oversight than anything intentional...cause a team committing a foul worthy of an upgrade, IMO, deserves no benefit of the doubt.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by APG

I'd venture it's more of an oversight than anything intentional...cause a team committing a foul worthy of an upgrade, IMO, deserves no benefit of the doubt.

We've had this discussion before -- and the NFHS came out with an interp that made it clear that when there was a single foul only on a common foul (and not an I or F) would the team retain the right to run the end-line.

From 2004-2005:
SITUATION 6: Team A scores a field goal. B1 picks up the ball and steps out of bounds at the end line to prepare for a throw-in. Before the throw-in is completed, A2 is called for an intentional (or flagrant) foul on B3 near the end line. RULING: B3 would shoot the two free throws for the intentional (or flagrant) foul with the lane cleared. Team B will then have a designated spot throw-in on the end line. (7-5-7, 7-5-11)

[APG]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

We've had this discussion before -- and the NFHS came out with an interp that made it clear that when there was a single foul only on a common foul (and not an I or F) would the team retain the right to run the end-line.

From 2004-2005:
SITUATION 6: Team A scores a field goal. B1 picks up the ball and steps out of bounds at the end line to prepare for a throw-in. Before the throw-in is completed, A2 is called for an intentional (or flagrant) foul on B3 near the end line. RULING: B3 would shoot the two free throws for the intentional (or flagrant) foul with the lane cleared. Team B will then have a designated spot throw-in on the end line. (7-5-7, 7-5-11)

Well the reasoning makes absolutely no sense to me. The offended team should never have their privileges taken away because of the illegal actions of their opponent...especially when their illegal actions are deemed to be more than the "norm."

Edit: Furthermore, it seems that NFHS is added an exception...when they do their best to not add exceptions in the name of simplicity...unless the exception is needed. No one has ever said...let's take away the privilege to use the entire endline after an upgraded foul in the situation presented above.

[BigCat]

Originally Posted by APG

Well the reasoning makes absolutely no sense to me. The offended teams should never have their privileges taken away because of the illegal actions of their opponent...especially when their illegal actions are deemed to be more than the "norm."

Add it to the list….(the no sense list)