NFHS New Rules are posted

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by 181174

Good Question. I am not sure, I guess I would have taken it back out of bounds closest to where the kick happened, I would guess that would just be like if the defensive player knocked the ball out of bounds, you would put it back in play where it went out, so when its kicked you take the ball out closest to where the kick ball happened.

Old rule - correct.
New rule - (by my reading) you'll go back to the original throw-in spot, as the throw-in hasn't ended.

[socalreff]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

Old rule - correct.
New rule - (by my reading) you'll go back to the original throw-in spot, as the throw-in hasn't ended.

No no no no....
If the kick occurs at the division line, you're gonna take it back to the endline?
The next throw-in is a result of the kick, not the AP. If you go back to the original spot, it's like replaying the AP throw-in. And then the arrow would switch. You must take it out where the kick occurs.
I really don't understand what's hard about this. It's the same principle as a throw-in after a basket.... if the defense kicks the throw-in, the offense retains the right to run the baseline -- the throw-in never ended!!!

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by socalreff

No no no no....
If the kick occurs at the division line, you're gonna take it back to the endline?
The next throw-in is a result of the kick, not the AP. If you go back to the original spot, it's like replaying the AP throw-in. And then the arrow would switch. You must take it out where the kick occurs.
I really don't understand what's hard about this. It's the same principle as a throw-in after a basket.... if the defense kicks the throw-in, the offense retains the right to run the baseline -- the throw-in never ended!!!

If you recall, though, there was a lot of discussion when NFHS first added the "offense still gets to run the baseline" rule in regard to whether a kick violation would have the ball go back underneath.

I'll admit that, right now, all I'm doing is speculating since the actual RULE BOOK hasn't been printed and released. That said, in previous years, I would award the ball at the spot of the kick, as the throw-in had finished, then B1 violated. Now that the kick no longer ends the throw-in, I would assume that we would go back to the original spot of the throw-in as if the throw-in had gone OOB untouched.

My two cents until the books are published.

[socalreff]

Originally Posted by Mark Dexter

If you recall, though, there was a lot of discussion when NFHS first added the "offense still gets to run the baseline" rule in regard to whether a kick violation would have the ball go back underneath.

I'll admit that, right now, all I'm doing is speculating since the actual RULE BOOK hasn't been printed and released. That said, in previous years, I would award the ball at the spot of the kick, as the throw-in had finished, then B1 violated. Now that the kick no longer ends the throw-in, I would assume that we would go back to the original spot of the throw-in as if the throw-in had gone OOB untouched.

My two cents until the books are published.

Which triggers a question: how can you say that the throw-in ended before the kick? Don't the 2 happen at the same time?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by socalreff

Which triggers a question: how can you say that the throw-in ended before the kick? Don't the 2 happen at the same time?

That was the fun part of the discussion - can you "touch" the ball first, then violate by kicking? Or, is the "touch" and the kick one in the same?

Now that the NFHS has made this clarification, we can't have that fun discussion anymore.

But, I'm sure we'll find something else to take it's place.