|
|||
Quote:
The new NCAA doesn't necessary change that. It only says that the throwin may stop before player control is established....at the touch. It doesn't say the the throwin ends before the violation....they've created the ambiguity but that may be cleared up through other means.
__________________
Owner/Developer of RefTown.com Commissioner, Portland Basketball Officials Association |
|
|||
Quote:
First, plugging the hole. If there was a foul or viloation before, the AP would stay with the inbounding team (team A), provided Team B committed the foul or violation. After we had a successful inbound, either team with legal control, then it would switch. My problem is, what needed to be fixed here? I'm just not seeing it. The new rule. Now, if there is a violation by the defense Team B, the AP was never completed and therefore the next jump ball stays with the current team. The problem here is this ruling has made it worse, imho. You are telling the defense to not try and play defense, just let them get the ball in so that the freaking arrow will change the other way. This is not what we want to happen to the game. This is where I argue the rule doesn't stand up to criterism. You fix one thing and break something else. This is why the space shuttle blew up on take-off, because a change was made that was not thought out completely. Once we ran it thru the system, we saw that this change is going to cause a problem over here. Sure, it fixes a terminology problem on the surface, but leaves a huge hole or problem on the backside. Teams retaining the AP 3, 4, 5 times or more in a row defeats the purpose of the AP. Can you see, you have just changed the definition of the Alternating Possession Arrow to Modified Possession Arrow. It is no longer alternating possession. That's big enough to cause the shuttle to explode on take-off. You go tink around with the fuel lodge of a million dollar aircraft and change the definition of what we thought this was designed to do. True, we're not dealing with a million dollar aircraft but I'm using this as an example to show how easy it is to create a catastrophy. I'm sure there was a lot of engineers at Nasa saying, the change is crystal clear, until the damn thing blew up on takeoff. No, it's not rocket science but this change ain't gonna fly. You can't go tinkering with stuff and not think it all the way thru. This band-aid fix is gonna cause major problems down the line. Look at how we have argued this. The OP stated as well as many others that there associations,when discussing this change couldn't come to an agreement. I just think we can do better and as offcials we should demand better rule changes from our rule makers. |
|
||||
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
Consider this. If on a APTI, you pass the ball to A2 and B3 knocks it out of bounds trying to steal. Violation on B3 for knocking the ball OOB. Now that this occurred on the APTI, it is now a violation throw-in and the AP stays with Team A while they get to also inbound the ball again. The next held ball goes to Team A because Team B tried to get the ball back, normal defense. That is how I am interpreting this change. Please correct me if I am wrong. These type of changes diminishes the game of basketball to me. On the back end, this hole is so big you could drive the space shuttle thru it. I'm not buying. |
|
|||
Quote:
Two humongous threads and he still doesn't get it. You're completely freaking WRONG again! B3 legally touched the throw-in in-bounds. That ends the throw-in. The arrow now changes to team B. IT DOESN"T STAY WITH TEAM A!!! After the arrow is changed, B3 knocks the ball OOB. Team A gets a throw-in for THAT violation. If you don't understand the basics, why post? |
|
|||
Quote:
OS, I've never commented before on your posts, but you're not getting it. AP points Team A. Held ball occurs. A1 to inbound. B1 kicks the throw-in on purpose. A1 gets throw in again, but using your words, the arrow now changes to point to B. So B1 commits a violation and gets the arrow changed to HIS TEAMS favor. And....you're OK with THAT? |
|
|||
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
The AP is a "throw-in", and the rules specifically say when a throw-in ends.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
2)Added the word in red for clarification...... |
|
|||
Quote:
The arrow changes on a legal touch, not an illegal touch. Dem's the rules, like it or not. |
|
|||
Quote:
2) You are right, thanks. I tried to make that clear in one of my earlier posts, but I didn't include that in this one. However, if you head over to the Int'l Date Line, you'll see I said that yesterday. Or tomorrow.
__________________
M&M's - The Official Candy of the Department of Redundancy Department. (Used with permission.) |
|
|||
Quote:
After the change, the AP is permanently kept with Team A because of Team B's violation or kicked ball. Now, I don't even try to go for the steal on the inbound so that I don't accidentally set the arrow permanent for Team A. I have to let Team A inbound the ball and then I go for the steal because if I accidentally kicked the ball or there's a violation, I get double jeopardy. I get the penalty for the violation and the AP is now null and void. Stays with team A. I don't know if you can permanently try to kick the ball like you are suggesting. If the pass is a bounce pass, then I can try and kick it to steal it, but if it's a pass, I can't kick it, which I'm trying to say, I don't think a team intentionally tries to do this or utilized this strategy to gain the arrow. Am I wrong here? |
|
||||
Quote:
I only jumped in here because I think the argument that B somehow would gain something by kicking the ball is flawed. Even if they get the next arrow, they haven't gained anything by kicking the ball. They would have had the next arrow anyway.
__________________
Sprinkles are for winners. |
Bookmarks |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
OK, let's all put in a "must slide" rule for safety reasons! | Dakota | Softball | 15 | Wed May 23, 2007 12:52pm |
Can "FOUL" be made "FAIR"? | PAT THE REF | Baseball | 60 | Sat Feb 24, 2007 09:01pm |
Why "general" and "additional"? | Back In The Saddle | Basketball | 1 | Sat Oct 07, 2006 02:56pm |