Michigan State v Purdue

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

... moving into the lane to rebound a free throw ... world record for basketball back-and-forth rule changes ... don't know why, it was very easy to adjust to each time it changed.

Maybe because we have dozens of free throws every game?

How frequently do we have a kick during an alternating possession throwin?

I've only had one since the alternating possession arrow was "invented", also coming after the most recent rule change. I called it wrong (based on the old rule) but my rookie partner, fresh from training classes, set me straight.

4.42.5 SITUATION: Team A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. A1’s throw-in pass is illegally kicked by B2. RULING: As a result of B2’s kicking violation, Team A is awarded a new throw-in at the designated spot nearest to where the kicking violation (illegal touching) occurred. Since the alternating-possession throw-in had not been contacted legally, the throw-in has not ended and therefore, the arrow remains with Team A for the next alternating-possession throw-in. COMMENT: The kicking violation ends the alternating-possession throw-in and as a result, a non-alternating-possession throw-in is administered. When the ball is legally touched on the subsequent throw-in following the kicking violation, the arrow shall not be changed and shall remain with Team A. (6-4-5)

How frequently do we have a jumper illegally catch the jump ball?

6.4.1 SITUATION C: Following the jump between A1 and B1 to start the first quarter, the jump ball: (d) is caught by A1. RULING: In (d), Team B will have a throw-in because of the violation and the arrow for the alternating-possession will be pointed towards Team A’s basket. (4-12-1; 4-28-1)

Just posting these two changed, but rare, rules helps me to remember them. Thanks for playing along. Hope I helped some other grizzled old-timers.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

Maybe because we have dozens of free throws every game?

How frequently do we have a kick during an alternating possession throwin?

4.42.5 SITUATION: Team A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. A1’s throw-in pass is illegally kicked by B2. RULING: As a result of B2’s kicking violation, Team A is awarded a new throw-in at the designated spot nearest to where the kicking violation (illegal touching) occurred. Since the alternating-possession throw-in had not been contacted legally, the throw-in has not ended and therefore, the arrow remains with Team A for the next alternating-possession throw-in. COMMENT: The kicking violation ends the alternating-possession throw-in and as a result, a non-alternating-possession throw-in is administered. When the ball is legally touched on the subsequent throw-in following the kicking violation, the arrow shall not be changed and shall remain with Team A. (6-4-5)

I remember concepts, not each individual rule. Throw-ins do not end if a foul or defensive violation occurs during the throw-in, so arrow does not change.

Unless POI is being enforced, throw-ins after fouls and violations are not AP throw-ins.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

I remember concepts, not each individual rule. Throw-ins do not end if a foul or defensive violation occurs during the throw-in, so arrow does not change. Unless POI is being enforced, throw-ins after fouls and violations are not AP throw-ins.

But the interpretations of said concepts weren't always what they are today.

In past times, a kick during a AP throwin led to the arrow being switched (it was a touch, an illegal touch, but nevertheless a touch that, by definition, ended the throwin), and a jumper illegally catching a jump ball led to his team losing the ball and losing the arrow (it was a possession, an illegal possession, but nevertheless a possession (holding the ball), arrow to other team; same as if nonjumper legally caught the ball, held it, and immediately traveled).

While the concepts (throwin ends, holding possession) may have stayed the same, these two interpretations (above) have changed, and are now incorrect.

Originally Posted by BillyMac

4.42.5 SITUATION: Team A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. A1’s throw-in pass is illegally kicked by B2. RULING: As a result of B2’s kicking violation, Team A is awarded a new throw-in at the designated spot nearest to where the kicking violation (illegal touching) occurred. Since the alternating-possession throw-in had not been contacted legally, the throw-in has not ended and therefore, the arrow remains with Team A for the next alternating-possession throw-in. COMMENT: The kicking violation ends the alternating-possession throw-in and as a result, a non-alternating-possession throw-in is administered. When the ball is legally touched on the subsequent throw-in following the kicking violation, the arrow shall not be changed and shall remain with Team A. (6-4-5)

6.4.1 SITUATION C: Following the jump between A1 and B1 to start the first quarter, the jump ball: (d) is caught by A1. RULING: In (d), Team B will have a throw-in because of the violation and the arrow for the alternating-possession will be pointed towards Team A’s basket. (4-12-1; 4-28-1)

[Raymond]

"6.4.1 SITUATION C: Following the jump between A1 and B1 to start the first quarter, the jump ball: (d) is caught by A1. RULING: In (d), Team B will have a throw-in because of the violation and the arrow for the alternating-possession will be pointed towards Team A’s basket. (4-12-1; 4-28-1)"

This is not an AP throw-in, it's a throw-in for a violation. The arrow is SET to Team A in response to Team B having initial possession of the ball. So, the arrow is not SWITCHED b/c it was never set in the first place.

It's only confusing if one concentrates on what it used to be instead of memorizing what it is.

A lot of things change over the years. At some point there is no excuse for not knowing the current rules. We don't get to consult with the forum in the middle of a game.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by Raymond

"6.4.1 SITUATION C: Following the jump between A1 and B1 to start the first quarter, the jump ball: (d) is caught by A1. RULING: In (d), Team B will have a throw-in because of the violation and the arrow for the alternating-possession will be pointed towards Team A’s basket. (4-12-1; 4-28-1)" This is not an AP throw-in, it's a throw-in for a violation. The arrow is SET to Team A in response to Team B having initial possession of the ball. So, the arrow is not SWITCHED b/c it was never set in the first place.

Originally Posted by Raymond

... it was never set in the first place.

At one time it was set at the illegal catch (holding equals possession, even if illegal holding, back then).

Great explanation (above post) of the current interpretation and the general concept behind it. But it hasn't always been that way. Once upon a time it was a possession, an illegal possession, but nevertheless a possession (holding the ball), arrow to other team (same as if nonjumper legally caught the ball, held it, and immediately traveled).

Only had it a few times in real games (both before and after the change), but had it on many, many refresher exams (both before and after the change). Always got it right, but it took a extra effort and "brain power". Never said that I didn't know it, it just took extra effort because it was a change from something different, "lose the ball and lose the arrow", that had been drummed into our brains for many, many years. Always look it up on refresher exam, double check just to be sure, why get a simple question wrong?

Like I said, I've now got this down pat, but only because I remember it as it's not "lose the ball and lose the arrow" anymore (after hearing "lose the ball and lose the arrow" at many, many meeting before the change). That works for me. Different strokes.

Originally Posted by Raymond

We don't get to consult with the forum in the middle of a game.

But I do get to slow down and think for a second, or two, a kind of "self consulting". Why rush? May even have a short tête-à-tête with my partner. Why not? How can it hurt?

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by BillyMac

May even have a short tête-à-tête with my partner. Why not? How can it hurt? ...

Even in my very shortest pregame conferences, if the referee doesn't say it, I will, "If anything weird happens, let's get together and talk about it". While there certainly can be much weirder situations, a jumper illegally catching a jump ball, and/or a kicked ball on an alternating possession throwin, can certainly be considered weird, odd, or rare situations worthy of a tête-à-tête between partners. Why not? How can it hurt?