New AP throw in rule

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So team B gets punished more for kicking during an AP throwin than they would for a normal throw-in.
Everyone seems to think the arrow should grant the team a "complete" throw-in. I think it should grant the team the opportunity for a throw-in, ending when the thrower gets the ball.
Switch the arrow when the thrower gets it, and all this other stuff goes away.

Think of it this way - each violation carries it's own penalty. If you do it as you're suggesting, A could lose the right to one of those penalties. For example, if B2 fouls A2 right when A1 is handed the ball, A gets the penalty for the foul, but A also loses the penalty of having a completed AP throw-in. The same as the original example - A gets the penalty for the kicking violation, but they would lose the right to the completed AP throw-in.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

So team B gets punished more for kicking during an AP throwin than they would for a normal throw-in.

What? No, they don't. Defensive kick during a non-AP throw-in results in a non-AP throw-in. Defensive kick during an AP throw-in results in a non-AP throw-in. They're punished exactly the same.

Everyone seems to think the arrow should grant the team a "complete" throw-in. I think it should grant the team the opportunity for a throw-in, ending when the thrower gets the ball.

I just disagree with this. The AP arrow doesn't grant the "opportunity" for a throw-in. It grants a throw-in, unless the offensive team screws up the throw-in.

[dkmz17]

Well, I guess am not in the camp of giving a "complete" throw in. I would think that the team receiving the throw in got the "advantage" or the "reward" of the AP arrow when the ball was not given to team B for a throw in to begin with.

[WIRef]

I wonder if we are taking this too far. Wouldn't the second throw-in be considered part of the original AP throw-in because of the kick, and when that throw-in is "legally" completed, the arrow would then change? The first AP throw-in never concluded because of the kicked ball. Not sure what to think of that.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by WIRef

Wouldn't the second throw-in be considered part of the original AP throw-in because of the kick, and when that throw-in is "legally" completed, the arrow would then change?

No, WIRef. Here's what I wrote previously in this thread:

Since the AP throw-in didn't end, the arrow is not switched. The next throw-in is NOT an AP throw-in. It is the result of the kick. Since it's not an AP throw-in, the arrow does not come into play at all. After the kick, there is simply a designated spot throw-in, and the arrow will not change.

That's because the defensive violation carries its own penalty, which does not involve the AP arrow.

Here's what Jurassic wrote:

What is the penalty for a kicked ball?

Answer: a throw-in for the other team.

The AP is a non-factor. Changing the arrow is not part of the kicked-ball penalty.

Here's what BktBallRef wrote:

An AP throw-in occurs after a held ball situation, not after the ball is kicked.

Sensing a theme? The penalty for a kicked ball is a designated spot throw-in. The penalty for a kicked ball is NOT an AP throw-in. The AP throw-in never ended, so the arrow never switched.

[todd66]

I do not believe it can any more clear that that.

Even though I get it now, it's a good thing this is an uncommon situation. I've never had a kicked ball on an AP throw-in.

Curious as to how many times this has happened in games you've officiated??

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

I know I am joining the fun very late in this thread, but when the thread first started I was in second day four straight days of officiating at team camps and I finally had the strength to read it just now. Boy, did I miss out on a lot of Old School bashing.

First, I want to commend everybody who did a fine job of giving Old School the business on this play. The play was not a difficult one but everybody knows how OS likes to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Second, as someone who believes that Alternating Possession is an abomination upon the game (the only bigger abomination upon the game is Old School), the best way to get rid of these goofy scenarios is to bring back the jump ball for all held ball situations.

Let the fun begin.

MTD, Sr.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

Second, as someone who believes that Alternating Possession is an abomination upon the game (the only bigger abomination upon the game is Old School), the best way to get rid of these goofy scenarios is to bring back the jump ball for all held ball situations.

And after every basket too....

Yup, I'd love to see us actually jump 'em up in one of those JV wimmens games where they have forty-eleven held balls.

Mark, please do me a favor. Next time you're out with The Preacher, ask him to please give you a smack upside the head for me.

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

And after every basket too....

Yup, I'd love to see us actually jump 'em up in one of those JV wimmens games where they have forty-eleven held balls.

Mark, please do me a favor. Next time you're out with The Preacher, ask him to please give you a smack upside the head for me.

JR

You don't have to ask The Preacher to do it. My better half will gladly smack me upside the head forty-eleven times for you.

MTD, Sr.

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

as someone who believes that Alternating Possession is an abomination upon the game (the only bigger abomination upon the game is Old School), the best way to get rid of these goofy scenarios is to bring back the jump ball for all held ball situations.

Bring it on - except in girls levels below HS Varsity - where you can't tell if you are at a B game or a Swim meet for all the diving that is going on.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.

I know I am joining the fun very late in this thread, but when the thread first started I was in second day four straight days of officiating at team camps and I finally had the strength to read it just now. Boy, did I miss out on a lot of Old School bashing.

I've seen worse in some of my games. Makes me feel right at home here. On the court and on the forum, yep, right at home, right in the heat of the battle.

First, I want to commend everybody who did a fine job of giving Old School the business on this play. The play was not a difficult one but everybody knows how OS likes to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Or not give up on the play. What we have here, in the great words of Cool Hand Luke, is a failure to communicate. I'm not communicating my position very well. I don't think that the Fed. of coaches would agree with this ruling either. Team A receiving the AP multiple times in a row because of a violation on the inbound. IOW's, you punishing good defense. If I try to steal the ball and cause a violation the AP is now null and void. Which means it doesn’t alternate.

Hold the phone! In order for there to be a violation, the AP awarded me the ball for the throw-in. Without the arrow in my favor from the AP. The throw-in would never have happen. So to me, you guys have circumvented this rule into something it was not originally intended to do. By saying the AP is not complete until a successful throw in, is wrong and at the heart of the argument. Maybe if you guys could quit hating on the messenger and start focusing on the issue, we might have come up with a resolution by now, instead of blindly following the rules into oblivion. Isn’t that what Jim Jones recommended, just drink the kool-aid. No, this rule has some issues and so does that kool-aid.

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.

What happens if there’s a violation of the offensive team? Team B gets the ball and the AP stays with Team A because the throw-in was not successful. The AP should just guarantee you possession, not a successful throw-in. Once I hand the player the ball, the AP has done it’s job. Now, in the event that we have another held ball on the throw-in. The AP will stay with the team currently inbounding, Team A. That makes since to me. Once we have a violation, the AP has ended. Not null and void but ended. Once the ball is inbounded, possession should now switch as in hence, alternating possession.

Just like in a jump ball. If you recover the ball from the jump you have possession. That possession is equivalent to me handing you the ball for the throw-in. What you do with it, is on you and we should not try to legislate the rules so that we help you get it inbounded successfully and reward you again with another AP from normal basketball play that carry's it's own punishment. That's too much big brother.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

I've seen worse in some of my games. Makes me feel right at home here. On the court and on the forum, yep, right at home, right in the heat of the battle.

Or not give up on the play. What we have here, in the great words of Cool Hand Luke, is a failure to communicate. I'm not communicating my position very well. I don't think that the Fed. of coaches would agree with this ruling either. Team A receiving the AP multiple times in a row because of a violation on the inbound. IOW's, you punishing good defense. If I try to steal the ball and cause a violation the AP is now null and void. Which means it doesn’t alternate.

Hold the phone! In order for there to be a violation, the AP awarded me the ball for the throw-in. Without the arrow in my favor from the AP. The throw-in would never have happen. So to me, you guys have circumvented this rule into something it was not originally intended to do. By saying the AP is not complete until a successful throw in, is wrong and at the heart of the argument. Maybe if you guys could quit hating on the messenger and start focusing on the issue, we might have come up with a resolution by now, instead of blindly following the rules into oblivion. Isn’t that what Jim Jones recommended, just drink the kool-aid. No, this rule has some issues and so does that kool-aid.

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.

What happens if there’s a violation of the offensive team? Team B gets the ball and the AP stays with Team A because the throw-in was not successful. The AP should just guarantee you possession, not a successful throw-in. Once I hand the player the ball, the AP has done it’s job. Now, in the event that we have another held ball on the throw-in. The AP will stay with the team currently inbounding, Team A. That makes since to me. Once we have a violation, the AP has ended. Not null and void but ended. Once the ball is inbounded, possession should now switch as in hence, alternating possession.

Just like in a jump ball. If you recover the ball from the jump you have possession. That possession is equivalent to me handing you the ball for the throw-in. What you do with it, is on you and we should not try to legislate the rules so that we help you get it inbounded successfully and reward you again with another AP from normal basketball play that carry's it's own punishment. That's too much big brother.

[Camron Rust]

Originally Posted by Old School

I don't think that the Fed. of coaches would agree with this ruling either. Team A receiving the AP multiple times in a row because of a violation on the inbound. IOW's, you punishing good defense. If I try to steal the ball and cause a violation the AP is now null and void. Which means it doesn’t alternate.

Explain how illegally touching the ball is good defense. No one is arguing that team A should be able to complete a throwin to their team....just that team B can't cause team A to lose the arrow by by a violation....that is the ENTIRE purpose of the rule change.

Originally Posted by Old School

Hold the phone! In order for there to be a violation, the AP awarded me the ball for the throw-in. Without the arrow in my favor from the AP. The throw-in would never have happen. So to me, you guys have circumvented this rule into something it was not originally intended to do. By saying the AP is not complete until a successful throw in, is wrong and at the heart of the argument.
...
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.

Again, it's not to guarantee success, just to guarantee that the defense can only stop it through legal means.

Originally Posted by Old School

What happens if there’s a violation of the offensive team? Team B gets the ball and the AP stays with Team A because the throw-in was not successful.

No. Team A loses the arrow anytime they violation during the AP throwin...yet another rule you don't know.

Originally Posted by Old School

The AP should just guarantee you possession, not a successful throw-in. Once I hand the player the ball, the AP has done it’s job.

Except that is not the rule...the AP hasn't done it's job until A gets the inbounds without a violation.

Originally Posted by Old School

Now, in the event that we have another held ball on the throw-in. The AP will stay with the team currently inbounding, Team A. That makes since to me. Once we have a violation, the AP has ended. Not null and void but ended. Once the ball is inbounded, possession should now switch as in hence, alternating possession.

Which happens first, the violation (kick) or the ball obtaining inbounds status? They happen at the same time. The rule effectively says to consider the violation as happening first.

Originally Posted by Old School

Just like in a jump ball. If you recover the ball from the jump you have possession. That possession is equivalent to me handing you the ball for the throw-in. What you do with it, is on you and we should not try to legislate the rules so that we help you get it inbounded successfully and reward you again with another AP from normal basketball play that carry's it's own punishment. That's too much big brother.

But the arrows is set when a player legally catches the ball after the jump.

Again, the rule doesn't guarantee you get it inbounds to your team...just that the defense can only cause the AP to end by legally touching the ball (even catching it)....not by kicking it.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Explain how illegally touching the ball is good defense. No one is arguing that team A should be able to complete a throwin to their team....just that team B can't cause team A to lose the arrow by by a violation....that is the ENTIRE purpose of the rule change.

Again, the rule doesn't guarantee you get it inbounds to your team...just that the defense can only cause the AP to end by legally touching the ball (even catching it)....not by kicking it.

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...