New AP throw in rule

[OHBBREF]

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

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.

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).

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.

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!

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.

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

Originally Posted by Old School

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.

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.)

[Mark Dexter]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

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!

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

[Old School]

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

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 possession -therefore- by your own logic it does guarantee the COMPLETION of the throw in so that you have team control of the ball (possession).

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

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

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.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Old School

Wrong! The AP is completed, imho!

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

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

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

Shouldn't this be a FAQ?

[Mark T. DeNucci, Sr.]

Originally Posted by Old School

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.

ROFLMAO

MTD, Sr.

[Camron Rust]

Quote:

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.

Originally Posted by OHBBREF

Under NFHS there is NO TEAM CONTROL ON A THROW IN - so there is no possession.

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.

[OHBBREF]

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Careful now OHBBREF...lest you wander down the OS path.

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

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

. 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.

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.