New AP throw in rule

Ohhh okay, now I get it!
After the kicking violation on B, it is no longer an AP throw-in for A, it's a throw-in for that violation.

Thus the next time we go to the AP it remains with Team A since they never used it. That makes since...
Even though B can lose the AP twice in a row, it their own fault for kicking the ball. That's the ticket

[dkmz17]

So if Team B reaches for the ball on the throw in, touches it with his/her hand, and then it drops and is kicked by Team B, the AP arrow changes? I still don't see the reason to differentiate between a violation that occurs as the first thing to happen after the throw in and one that occurs after the ball is "legally touched". Any comments?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by dkmz17

So if Team B reaches for the ball on the throw in, touches it with his/her hand, and then it drops and is kicked by Team B, the AP arrow changes? I still don't see the reason to differentiate between a violation that occurs as the first thing to happen after the throw in and one that occurs after the ball is "legally touched". Any comments?

You've got it.

That's why the discussion before this was interesting - on a kick, would the ball be legally touched (for a fraction of a second), then the violation? Or is the kick a violation immediately? We now know it's a violation immediately.

[dkmz17]

One last question, as a guy that is frequently the timer or scorekeeper for games, will the officials signal the table that the throw in never ended and the AP arrow should not change?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by dkmz17

One last question, as a guy that is frequently the timer or scorekeeper for games, will the officials signal the table that the throw in never ended and the AP arrow should not change?

Hopefully. There is no "signal", per se, but the officials should communicate in some fashion that the arrow needs to stay with the same team, and that the next throw-in is for the violation. As a table person, now that you know the rule, you can remind the officials as well in that situation if they don't remember the change.

[Old School]

Jump ball situation, AP points to team A. Team A is given ball for throw-in. B kicked ball. A is given ball for throw-in. A successfully passes ball in and while in possession, we have another jump ball. AP is still with A. Give team A the ball again. That is wrong!! That is just plain wrong!!! Team A has gotten the jump ball twice in a row on a jump ball. That defeats the purpose of the Alternating Possession. Why does the fact that a violation occurred b4 the throw-in is completed matter? Why? The rule makes no since. Guys, you got to be deeper thinkers then this. Our profession is certainly going to go down the tubes with weak thinkers like you that's too damn afraid to stand your own ground. It's got nothing to do with what I think, but does the rule pass the smell test? This one doesn't the way it has just been defined here. Say what you want to say about me as a person but at least I stand my ground. You can't just sell me anything. We might as well just go center circle, jump it up if we're going to play this bullsh!t. How in the hell am I going to explain to the coach that the same team over and over and over will keep getting the AP because of a violation on the original throw-in. Teams are going to think we are cheating and that's going to be an even bigger problem to deal with. That's dumb, I'm sorry, until someone explains the rational to me, that's just dumb.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old School

That is wrong!! That is just pain wrong!!!

Pain is what I'm feeling right now...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

Jump ball situation, AP points to team A. Team A is given ball for throw-in. B kicked ball. A is given ball for throw-in. A successfully passes ball in and while in possession, we have another jump ball. AP is still with A. Give team A the ball again. That is wrong!! That is just plain wrong!!! Team A has gotten the jump ball twice in a row on a jump ball. That defeats the purpose of the Alternating Possession. Why does the fact that a violation occurred b4 the throw-in is completed matter? Why? The rule makes no since.

2) It's got nothing to do with what I think, but does the rule pass the smell test? This one doesn't the way it has just been defined here.

3) Say what you want to say about me as a person but at least I stand my ground.

4) How in the hell am I going to explain to the coach that the same team over and over and over will keep getting the AP because of a violation on the original throw-in.

Sigh.....

1) The rules make no sense to you because you simply don't understand them. You're got two completely different plays that are handled two different ways, by rule. They've got absolutely nothing to do with each other. You simply call each play by it's own applicable rule. If you don't know the rules, you come up with some convoluted nonsense trying to explain something that you can't comprehend in the first place. The throwing team did NOT get the ball twice in a row on a jump ball. They got the ball once because of a kicking violation by the other team, and they got the ball the other time because they had the AP. You simply don't understand the play and the applicable rules.

2) WTF is "passing the smell test"? You call the damn game by the rules, not by some stoopid freaking "smell test". Un-freaking-believable.....

3) Nobody is saying anything about you as a person. We're saying that you obviously aren't an official, JMO. You might be the nicest person in the whole world, but that doesn't change the fact that you know piss-all about basketball officiating. And you keep proving that over and over.

4)You tell the freaking coach that it's the freaking rule. That's exactly the same as you do any other time that you might get questioned. Who cares if the coach might happen to be as dumb as you are when it comes to the rules and doesn't understand them either?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

4)You tell the freaking coach that it's the freaking rule. That's exactly the same as you do any other time that you might get questioned. Who cares if the coach might happen to be as dumb as you are when it comes to the rules and doesn't understand them either?

That's just plain uncall for but coming from you, not a big surprise. The moderators let you say and get away with a lot more than some of us. If I talked like this my whole thread would get deleted.

Anyway, I'm going to try this one more time.
1.) Beep! Jump ball!!!!
2.) Jump ball AP arrows points to team A
3.) Team A given ball for throw-in.
4.) Violation, kick ball on defense
5.) Team A inbound ball again, successfully.
6.) Beep! Jump ball again!
7.) AP still points to Team A because AP throw-in never occurred because of violation on defense. Team B coach goes ballistic and gets ejected. Reasoning is he knows that nobody in charge of the rules in their right mind would think of something like that, and accuses referee's of cheating.
8.) Team A given ball for inbound from AP
9.) Team B violation again, kick ball
10.) Team A inbound again from kick ball violation, successfully
11.) Beep! Jump ball
12.) AP still points to Team A.

In case you can't figure my example out JR because you have too much hate in your heart, that's 3 jump balls, 3 consequtive jump balls, all going to the same team. That defeats the purpose of the AP arrow. If you reason this is okay and consistent with thE rules of fair play. You need to get the hell out of basketball because you are ruining the sport with your legal BS!

Again, if this is the way I am understanding this rule then it is wrong, this is cheating in my book. If we can't get the AP rules right then screw it and let's toss the ball center circle on all the jump balls. That is fair play, IMHO!

[legend]

Originally Posted by dkmz17

One last question, as a guy that is frequently the timer or scorekeeper for games, will the officials signal the table that the throw in never ended and the AP arrow should not change?

This would be something that the "R" should communicate to the table I.E. the timekeeper during his pregame table visit. However one of the 3 should give some eye contact and let you know which way the ap should be going. If your not sure on the next DEAD ball buzz them over and make sure its correct.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Ch1town

Ohhh okay, now I get it!
After the kicking violation on B, it is no longer an AP throw-in for A, it's a throw-in for that violation.

Thus the next time we go to the AP it remains with Team A since they never used it. That makes since...
Even though B can lose the AP twice in a row, it their own fault for kicking the ball. That's the ticket

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.

[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.

[dkmz17]

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.

I disagree with the logic of the rule, the penalty occurred when Team B lost the right to the ball in the first place.

Now they can get penalized twice especially if they commit a violation on the throw in that otherwise would not have affect possession of the ball... as in the OP a kick on the throw in, Team A had the throw in and still gets the throw in after the kick... If Team A had the ball in play and Team B kicks it Team B is not "penalized", Team A just gets the ball back for a throw in. However, under the new rule, Team B suffers a "penalty" for kicking the ball on a throw in.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by dkmz17

Now they can get penalized twice especially if they commit a violation on the throw in that otherwise would not have affect possession of the ball... as in the OP a kick on the throw in, Team A had the throw in and still gets the throw in after the kick... If Team A had the ball in play and Team B kicks it Team B is not "penalized", Team A just gets the ball back for a throw in. However, under the new rule, Team B suffers a "penalty" for kicking the ball on a throw in.

How are they getting penalized twice?

The penalty for kicking the ball during a throw-in is simply another repeated throw-in. If you take away the arrow from the throwing team also, then you're penalizing the throwing team for the defensive team's violation as well as rewarding the defensive team for committing that violation by giving them the AP. That doesn't really seem to be very fair, or logical imo.

Btw, the penalty for the kick during play is now EXACTLY the same as the penalty for a kick during a throw-in. The other team gets a throw-in and the arrow doesn't change.

[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.