Quote:
Originally posted by rockyroad
Quote:
Originally posted by Snaqwells
I really don't like this aspect. As far as I'm concerned, the arrow should change when the ball is handed to the thrower. Everything that happens after that is a direct result of the throw in, therefore the arrow has served its purpose.
But, I'm not on "the committee." 
|
So A has the arrow, you hand them the ball, and have the arrow switched, then B4 grabs A4 and throws him/her to the floor before the ball is thrown-in...you properly call the foul but A never gets their throw-in??? And you like that idea???
|
Very much. This foul is a direct result of the throw in, which is a result of the arrow. To me, the arrow should grant the right to have a throw in, not the right to a successful throwin.
Currently, I see the situation you set up above as unfairly penalizing a foul based on when it occurs.
Now, let's say A is throwing the ball in following an OOB violation and B1 fouls A2. Do we somehow preserve this throwin for later use? No. Yet many people think we should grant another throwin to the offended team if a defensive foul occurs following a held ball situation.
The way I see it, the defense is doubly penalized for a foul when it occurs during an AP throwin.
Wed Apr 21, 2004, 07:23am
Threaded Mode
