Throw-in ends

[Kelvin green]

Looking closely at the wording in Rule 4, Rule 7, and Rule 9 I think there is something we missed as we discussed the "unannounced rule change) ...

They changed the wording in 4-42-5 (as aptly pointed out in previous thread) that states throw-in ends when ball is touched by player inbounds or out of bounds...

This would change the way we administer the AP arrow...

Previous to that change if Team A is throwing the ball in and it hit B (not A since it was a violation on A) who was standing OOB it was a violation on Team A because the rule stated it had to be touched by player inbounds... Team loses their throw-in because B touched the ball while being OOB....

If you did not think it was a violation on B because you ruled the ball being caused to go OOB by B (which I would think is an incorrect ruling since the ball still did not go inbounds) then the scenario would look like this

Team A throws ball in, and B touches it OOB (first to touch). By definition the throw-in had not ended. So arrow is not switched yet and the new throw-in by A still with arrow pointing A's direction--- Now there is a foul by either a or B on the throw-in, we penalize the foul and A keeps the arrow after making one throw-in already

We need to make sure we look at the whole context as to why the rule wording was changed They just carried that line over from Rule 4 to Rule 7 and 9... We cant read one line in a vaccuum.

[Adam]

Thanks, Kelvin. This changes my ruling on the other play slightly. We're coming to the original spot for a throwin by A, but we're changing the arrow right away.
I like that better; but I think the arrow ought to change when the ball is at the disposal of the thrower. Until the Fed agrees with me, however....

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

By definition the throw-in had not ended.

I most certainly have the throw-in ending here.

6-4-4 The direction of the possession arrow is reversed immediately after an alternating-possession throw-in ends. An alternating-possession throw-in ends when the throw-in ends or when the throw-in team violates.

4-42-5 The throw-in ends when the passed ball touches, or is touched by, another player who is either inbounds or out of bounds.

The throw-in ended. Throw-in violation on B for violating 9-2-10. Switch the arrow on B's touch/violation. A's ball at original throw-in designated spot.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

I most certainly have the throw-in ending here.

6-4-4 The direction of the possession arrow is reversed immediately after an alternating-possession throw-in ends. An alternating-possession throw-in ends when the throw-in ends or when the throw-in team violates.

4-42-5 The throw-in ends when the passed ball touches, or is touched by, another player who is either inbounds or out of bounds.

The throw-in ended. Throw-in violation on B for violating 9-2-10. Switch the arrow on B's touch/violation. A's ball at original throw-in designated spot.

Yet, when the defense violates with a kick ball during the throwin; we don't change the arrow.

[HawkeyeCubP]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Yet, when the defense violates with a kick ball during the throwin; we don't change the arrow.

We don't? Kicking is a violation, yes, but it's not a throw-in violation by A. It's a touch. The throw-in ends when the thrown ball is touched, or when A violates, doesn't it?

[Adam]

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

We don't? Kicking is a violation, yes, but it's not a throw-in violation by A. It's a touch. The throw-in ends when the thrown ball is touched, or when A violates, doesn't it?

I've been told not to. Just as if the defense kicks the ball on an endline throwin, we give them the endline. Hey, I'm all for switching the arrow on this.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

Looking closely at the wording in Rule 4, Rule 7, and Rule 9 I think there is something we missed as we discussed the "unannounced rule change) ...

They changed the wording in 4-42-5 (as aptly pointed out in previous thread) that states throw-in ends when ball is touched by player inbounds or out of bounds...

I pointed that out in post #17 of this thread:
Where is the Throw-in?

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

This would change the way we administer the AP arrow...

Previous to that change if Team A is throwing the ball in and it hit B (not A since it was a violation on A) who was standing OOB it was a violation on Team A because the rule stated it had to be touched by player inbounds...

That's not correct because 9-2-2 has included "or out of bounds" for years.
". . . Fail to pass the ball directly into the court from out-of-bound so it touches or is touched by another player (inbounds or out of bounds) on the court before going out of bounds untouched."
This means that the thrower did not violate a throw-in provision. So there was no violation on Team A in this case.

Due to the old wording of how a throw-in ended, there was a case to be made for allowing Team A to keep the arrow in the play which you describe, since previously the violation by Team B occurred during the throw-in and that throw-in did NOT end.

The change to 4-42-5 this season fixes that. The AP throw-in does end with the touch by the OOB opponent and the AP arrow is switched. The ensuing throw-in for Team A returns to the original spot per the current wording of the penalty section in 9-2.

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

We need to make sure we look at the whole context as to why the rule wording was changed They just carried that line over from Rule 4 to Rule 7 and 9... We cant read one line in a vaccuum.

I agree with your sentiment, but it looks to me like the words were carried in the other direction. They were in Rule 9 and now have been carried over to Rule 4.

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells
Yet, when the defense violates with a kick ball during the throwin; we don't change the arrow.

Originally Posted by HawkeyeCubP

We don't? Kicking is a violation, yes, but it's not a throw-in violation by A. It's a touch. The throw-in ends when the thrown ball is touched, or when A violates, doesn't it?

Now that's a good question. I know that the rule is that the team retains the right to run the endline if the first touch is a kick by the opponent, but I can't recall anything stating that the throwing team retains the arrow. I'd have to go with it's a touch (not a legal touch) and switch the arrow.

BTW I would not switch the arrow if Team B committed a boundary plane violation during an AP throw-in. I would award a new throw-in at the original spot, which is NOT an AP throw-in and keep the arrow pointed in the same direction.

[Adam]

I think I was thinking of the end-line throwin precedent and applying it to the arrow. It's a good thing I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong. It's easy here, though, because I wanted to be wrong here.