Change of Possession

[rwest]

Is losing a ball out of bounds considered a change of possession when considering whether to go with point of interruption on a correctable error?

For example, B1 commits a common foul against A1. Team A is in the bonus but the table and the officials do not recognize this. Team A inbounds the ball. While passing the ball around the ball goes out of bounds off of A2. It's now B's ball. While the ball is dead and before it is made live for the throw-in, the table notifies the officials that A1 should have shot a 1-and-1.

Has possession officially changed? Do we allow A1 to shoot his free-throws with the lane cleared and then continue with the POI with a throw-in by B?

Do violations or fouls also cause a change of possession for this purpose? For example, A1 travels or pushes B1. In both cases if the correctable error is recognized before the ball becomes live on the throw-in do we go with the POI after the 1-and-1 for A1?


Thanks!
Randall

[walter]

I say no change of possession in either scenario since the ball is not yet at B's disposal for a throw-in. I would say you go back and play on from A's merited free throws. I don't have the books in front of me but that's my initial opinion.

[FrankHtown]

I would consider the point of interruption to be the throw-in by B. Yes, I would clear the lane for A's throws, then resume with a spot throw-in by B.

[BktBallRef]

Interesting question. The rule book doesn't define "change of possession."

What's fair? Shoot the FTs and then give the ball to B for a throw-in.

What do I think the rules support? Resume play with the FTs.

I don't recall seeing this in the case boo and I'm not looking now. Smebody else can.

[M&M Guy]

Originally posted by BktBallRef
I don't recall seeing this in the case boo

Getting ready for Halloween?

[Camron Rust]

While B doesn't have control, they do have "possession". It's not explicitly defined in any book but it's B's ball as soon as the infraction occurs. What if you started the throwin, B takes a timeout, then it is disocvered in the timeout? Assuming it is still correctable, I think this example demonstrates that it really is B's ball.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
While B doesn't have control, they do have "possession".

I think the new definition of POI supports Camron's thinking. If we have a double foul while the try is in the air, there is no team control. But if the ball goes in, we resume play by giving the ball to the team that just got scored on. This seems to imply that it was their ball even before they "possessed" it for the throw-in.

I could be convinced either way, but on first look, I go with the OOB violation is a change of possession.

[bob jenkins]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
While B doesn't have control, they do have "possession". It's not explicitly defined in any book but it's B's ball as soon as the infraction occurs. What if you started the throwin, B takes a timeout, then it is disocvered in the timeout? Assuming it is still correctable, I think this example demonstrates that it really is B's ball.

I agree. There's a case play (somewhere in 2.10) where the first dead ball is caused by a held ball. The ruling is that if the arrow is pointed in A's direction, shoot the FTs as normal. If the arrow is pointed in B's direction, shoot the FTs with no one on the lane, and give B the ball.

The same logic should apply here.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by Camron Rust
Assuming it is still correctable, I think this example demonstrates that it really is B's ball.

It is not still correctable, though.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by bob jenkins

I agree. There's a case play (somewhere in 2.10) where the first dead ball is caused by a held ball. The ruling is that if the arrow is pointed in A's direction, shoot the FTs as normal. If the arrow is pointed in B's direction, shoot the FTs with no one on the lane, and give B the ball.

The same logic should apply here.

good catch, bob!

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by rainmaker

It is not still correctable, though.

Agreed (for my added example). It was merely to point out who had "possession".

[rwest]

My original example is correctable, is it not? We have until the first dead ball after the clock starts. The clock started when the ball was touched on the inbounds pass. The first dead ball occurred when the ball went out of bounds, the violation or foul occurred.

[Camron Rust]

Originally posted by rwest
My original example is correctable, is it not? We have until the first dead ball after the clock starts. The clock started when the ball was touched on the inbounds pass. The first dead ball occurred when the ball went out of bounds, the violation or foul occurred.

Your example is correctable...my modified play was not becasue I added more to it.