New Interp wrong?

[Nevadaref]

Originally posted by Kelvin green
My two cents...

All they did in this is say that a T or intentional carry its own penalty which is the reawarding of the ball at a spot out of bounds.

Previously if you read them strictly then a T after a shot would be taken back to have a throw-in and run the baseline. That is incosistent with the T penalty. The same applies for intentional fouls.

They are just ceaning up an inconsistentcy.

Following the FTs for a T you ALWAYS went to the division line designated spot throw-in. Running the end line was never an issue after a T. The rule change this season is only for flagrant or intentional fouls.

Originally posted by DownTownTonyBrown

Rule 7-5-11
...After an intentional personal foul, as in 4-19-3, or flagrant personal foul, as in 4-19-4, any player of the team to whom the free throws have been awarded shall make the THROW-IN FROM THE OUT-OF-BOUNDS SPOT NEAREST THE FOUL.

So even though we don't like the case play/designated spot throw-in, it is supported by 7-5-11.

Thanks for posting the new 7-5-7 and 7.5.7SitD. I'm glad that the NFHS was at least thorough and made the case book plays agree with the new "clarification," which like last season's 4-23 is really a rule change. Why don't they just admit it and call it a CHANGE?

However, your citation of 7-5-11 in order to support this new interp is erroneous. The old 7-5-11 is a general case talking about flagrants or intentionals that happen during the normal course of play, not specifically during a throw-in when a team has the running priviledge. 7-5-7 dealt with that specific situation.
What you have done is akin to citing 7-5-5 and saying that this rule would support a designated-spot throw-in after a common foul during a throw-in. This rule simply doesn't apply in this case because 7-5-7 is more specific and overrides it.