For MTD: http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...s/banghead.gif


For OS: http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...images/ban.gif

That's cute.

MTD, Sr.

So in this case the Team a gets to keep the ball for the technical foul and would get to keep the AP arrow because the Throw in was not completed.
But under your Scenario they would lose the AP because Team B commited a delay of game violation!

Where in this scenario is there any logic. Reward the other team if they commit a rules infraction witht he AP arrow?

Wrong again. :(

Cool Hand Luke did NOT say "What we have here is a failure to communicate."

The words were spoken by a prison guard captain in the movie.

As for you, you're communicating your postion as best you can. Unfortunately, you're wrong, as always.

You specifically wanted to stick to the NFHS Rules for now:

Under NFHS there is NO TEAM CONTROL ON A THROW IN - so there is no possiession -therefore- by your own logic it does guarantee the COMPLETION of the throw in so that you have team control of the ball (posession).


They get to keep the ball for the same reason that they get to keep the AP Arrow if the Defence commits a violation The AP throw in has not been completed!


Wrong Wrong Wrong Wrong Wrong - That possession establishes Team Control
NO TEAM CONTROL ON A THROW IN

So If on a non AP throw in A1 throws the pass toward A3 but B3 kicks the ball and it hits A3 then goes out of bounds it should be Team B ball ?

You are not being rewarded with a new AP if the defence violates they are being punished under the rules of the violation - (By the way violations and fouls IMO_ are not normal basketball plays that is why they carry penalties.)

Nice answer to OS, but I think I'm going to have to report you to Padgett for speaking metric!

A great, great movie and an even better book.

http://www.prisonflicks.com/images/CHLCaptain.jpg

Understood! Thanks for clarification, but we still have a problem.

Wrong! The AP is completed, imho! They get to keep the ball because of the violation. The held ball situation is no more at this point in time. If the AP doesn’t guarantee successful throw-in, then why shouldn’t it switch right now? You say that a team shouldn't lose possession because of a violation. Well, they didn't. They still got the ball for the in-bound. What is so great or so bad, that a violation of the throw-in puts the team in possession of the AP arrow at a disadvantage where you need to tweak the rules in the favor of the offense? How are they so disadvangated? I don't understand this piece.

Remember why the AP was brought in, in the first place. Once I jump the ball, the held ball-jump ball (AP) situation is over, especially if there’s a violation. For instance, I toss the ball on the jump, it gets tipped, while trying to retrieve tip ball, B4 kicks the ball off A3 and then OOB. Violation Team B for the kick ball, team A gets the ball, Team b gets the arrow (AP). That is how it would be done if we jumped it.

Now, we got something that doesn’t even resemble the jump ball situation. You smart brain wizards, and I’m disappointed Mark on the fact that you can’t see this, but you guys have outsmarted yourself. The payload to this new rule is too big a price to pay for me. Team A, getting multiple AP possessions because of a violation by the defense, is not the original intent of the rule and it is not going to fly. I’m telling you, the space shuttle is going to blow up on takeoff. Some smart-azz engineer has got this new idea and it does not coincide with the original design. It sounds good on paper but it ain’t gonna fly.

It may be the rule, but it is not a good rule. We need to think a little bit harder about this one.

Your opinion is completely contrary to the rule and completely irrelevant to this discussion.

Quote:
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD class=alt2 style="BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset">Originally Posted by Old School

First, the AP grants you possession. It does not or should not guarantee you a successful throw-in. If there’s a violation of the throw-in, you don’t lose the ball anyway. You are now on to something else, like another spot throw-in. AP is now done.



</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
Careful now OHBBREF...lest you wander down the OS path.

Possession and Team Control are not one and the same. In fact, a team has possession before they have team control. Take a look at the correctable error rules/cases to see what I mean. A team's possession generally begins the moment an infraction or goal (by the opposite team) occurs or when a team gains control of a ball from a steal/rebound/etc.

ROFLMAO

MTD, Sr.

Again, even if the defense commits a violation, what disadvangate has occurred to the offense in relation to the AP? They still got the ball for the throw-in.

So a violation was committed. So what? What advantage has the defense gained? I don't understand...

Tell me something I don't know!

Why do you want to say something like that? I have never said anything bad about You - :D

I see what you are saying - Mind you this is my Opinion - but since the tie up is because there is no clear possession of the ball I do not have team posession. but good point.

Lah me.....

The defensive team violates. If the rule was written the way that you want it to be instead of the way that it is ,the offensive team would lose the arrow because of that defensive violation. That's the freaking advantage that the defense would gain by committing a violation. We've been trying to tell you that for freaking days.

Shouldn't this be a FAQ?

If my moderator application gets accepted, you won't have to do that anymore. :)

So what! That's my point that I have failed to get across. They don't get the ball!!!! Gaining the possession arrow is nothing, you want the ball. Nothing is gained from the defense, nothing is lost from the offense. We got zero here in terms of possession and the ball. I don't understand why the rulemakers feel they need to do something here or change this rule.

Now, if the ball was switched or given to the defense for the throw-in, we got a problem, but the rules of the violation takes care of that. Either way, the offense should lose the arrow. For example:

1. Successful throw-in, arrow changes
2. Defense steals throw-in, arrow changes
3. Violation offense, arrow changes
4. Violation or foul defense, no arrow change until 1, 2, or 3 above.

Eliminating that the arrow doesn't change after #4 above is a problem. That means offense gets it again, and again. That's an unfair, unneeded imo advanatage. The violation the defense committed is now two-fold. You ensured they kept the ball (violation - which carries it's own penality) and the AP. That's like double jeopardy, convicting me for the same crime twice.

Allowing the arrow to switch simply mean the next "ALTERNATING" possession goes to the next team, not the same team. Wow, I definitely not understanding the merits behind this change.

May I suggest that each of us update our ignore list? This is pointless.

Why do you need a list to just ignore someone? Do you need an ignore list or a piece of software to ignore a coach? ;)

Peace

Translation: Without the chicken there would be no egg! Or is it No egg begets no chicken? I'm so confused....:confused:

If we used OS way of thinking all AP's would be handled by a Check ball at the top of the key!:rolleyes:

For anybody else reading this except Goofus, this is what Goofus is recommending:
Defense violates during an AP throw-in. Defense now gets AP arrow because they violated.

Goofus can't figure out what's wrong wth this picture.:rolleyes:

Defense now gets the arrow, but the offense still has the ball. It's not unfair.

Yes, I'm re-evaluating my opinion on this; but the stopped-clock theory leaves me some hope.

The offense loses the arrow because of a defensive violation, and you think that's fair?

OK..........:rolleyes:

Where can I get my hands on such software :confused: :D

When I find it you will be the first to know. ;)

Peace

If I don't see a post, then I can more easily pass it by. There's zero chance if reading it.

Coaches? Yes. They're called earplugs.

Offense already had the ball. You aren't giving them anything.

So based on that - If under NFHS rules Player A1 has the ball and B1 reaches out in shoves him and the official calls the foul INTENTIONAL - Penalty two shot and team A gets the Ball ...
Team A has the ball and the coach on team A didn't like your lack of a call on a rebound and stands up and Calls you a good for nothing MF Arse who's heratige is in serious question as to being human and you "T" him up ... .
It seems to come down to a situation where you do not like the rule.

I do not like the Jumpstop rule
but I deal with it ...
I actually have become very good at calling it and getting it right - That would be how most healthy people deal with these type of things other wise it eats you up inside and you become old and jaded

It seems we have lost our way on this topic. The fact is this is the new rule and we must enforce it rather we like it or not. I do not believe that this rule leaves any room for interpretation such as contact being a foul or not.(advantage/disadvantage).

Hopefully, the Federation will be getting a case play out to us to show us exactly the way they want this situation to be handled.

No, but for some games, noise-cancelling headphones would be nice. I'll have to call up Bose and see if they can manufacture them pre-tuned to howler monkey frequencies.

To allow the arrow to be switched might seem fair except that the defense can play a little differently...they chance getting something out of trying a marginally legal play. They have nothing to lose between a play that might end up in a violation if A gets the throwin but B gets the arrow. By letting the throwin team keep the arrow, the defense will lose something if they violate....the next arrow. Sure, it is not "this" possession, but one more future arrow is worth something.

How? Nobody coaches for this. How are you going to play defense differently? You trying to win the game, you not committing a violation to get the arrow. You need the ball, the arrow not gonna get you jack, but maybe fired at the end of the season.

I'm not saying give team B the arrow on the violation. That's motor mouth JR with that ridiculous crap, trying to hyjack my position. After the ball is inbounded following the violation is when the arrow should switch. By not switching it, leaving it with Team A, the next held ball stays with A. That's the problem.

If i commit a violation on a AP throw-in, nobody gains anything. Nobody lost anything. I know I've said this before. If you tack on, lost of AP switch to my violation on the throw-in, which I know I've said this before, carries it's own penality, I just got penalized twice and for what?

Maybe the problem with me here is coaching. I don't think coaches coach for the AP. I could be wrong. Don't know what the hell that's going to get you, but if you want to coach for it, then maybe we need a new rule for something you are trying to do that I'm not aware of.

Maybe we get some coaches to chime in and share if this is something you actually coach for in the game. Maybe just share with me, where the team benefits when you do this because I can't see it.

Naw, JMO, the problem with you is that you don't know or understand basic rules.