|
Quote:
Okay, I understand where you have gone in and dinked the rule up with the slap OOB. Because I slapped it, the AP has ended even though the throwin was not successful. Got it! Problem is, if I slapped it OOB, we're still at the TI, if I kick it, we're still at the TI. One rules the AP has ended, the other rules the AP is not only, "not ended", but it is now null and void as if it NEVER HAPPENED! Both violations carry the same penality except one is now penalized more, and that is the heart of the arguement. The rational behind the additional penality is at the heart of my arguement. The pay load on the back end, multiple successive APTI in a row changes the original intent of this rule. Not to mention Case Play 6.4.1 Sit D. says a team should not get successive APTI, but your fluky dukie new rule, null and void the AP. It's like it never happened. Logic like this will cause the space shuttle to blow up on takeoff. Let me break it down to you this way JR, aka Master Silly Monkey. If it wasn't for the APTI, you couldn't have had the kick ball. So, without the hen there can't be an egg. So what I'm saying is the kick ball can not negate the APTI. Either we go back to the APTI or the arrow must change, the same way it did for the slap OOB. If you negate the APTI after the kick, you are saying it never happened and that's wrong, that's not an option. Get it? |
Quote:
Old School: I am going to hate myself in the morning, but xxxx! Read the damn definition of a throw-in and what it says about passing the ball such that it crosses through the plane of the boundary line where the throw-in spot is, and the ball is then LEGALLY touched by a player on the court (either inbounds or out-of-bounds). PLEASE, PLEASE, I beg you to take a baseketball officiating class and learn the rules and how to apply them. You are giving everybody headaches with your nonsense. MTD, Sr. |
Quote:
Think about it - when does the violation actually occur? On the kick, the violation happens the instant the ball is intentionally touched with the leg. On the OOB, the violation occurs only when the ball touches OOB, not when it touches the player. A1 throws the ball in, A2 slaps it, it bounces 17 times all the way down the floor and goes OOB on the far baseline. Where do you put the ball in play for the next throw-in? Are you are saying the violation occurs on the slap? If so, then would you give the ball to B to throw-in closest to where A2 slapped it? Or would you take the throw-in closest to where the ball went OOB? Or, let's say after A2 slaps it, and just before it touches OOB, A3 grabs it. Is there still a violation on the slap? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Both violations carry the same penality except one is now penalized more, and that is the heart of the arguement. Quote:
Quote:
Also, what rule or case are you using to back up you assertion that the APTI is "null and void"? |
Quote:
On a APTI for team A, if offense A1 kicks the inbounds pass, then team B would get the throwin for the violation, but the arrow would still be for team A because the APTI never ended. With your interpretation, team B would get the throwin and the arrow. I believe that to be wrong. |
Quote:
I'm just saying, I think that is how it should be, but there are rules at every level I would like to see changed, so is one more thing I can't really complain about since I can't change it.*shrug* |
It is very unlikely that an offensive player would intentionally kick the throw in from his/her own teammate.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Now if you want to argue that if the inbound spot is not the same, then we are on to something else. I could appreciate that but it doesn't change the fact. However, if the spot of the APTI has not changed, the APTI has not ended, just like running the endline privileged has not ended because of the kick ball violation. Remember that rule? You can not say the AP has not ended after I attempted to throw the ball in, therefore, the next held or jump ball goes to me again. That’s like saying if you borrow some money from the bank, $100 dollars, but before you leave the bank, you lose the money. Well, that doesn't change the fact that the bank gave you the money, and guess what, you owe that money back. Once the bank gives you the money, OR once I hand you the ball from the APTI. The arrow has to change or we better have a foul. You can not say that because I kicked the ball, the AP now stays with the same team again while they get to inbound the ball again. That's like saying the APTI never happened. That's like saying the bank never gave you the money. The banks doesn't care if you lost it and I don't care if you kicked the ball on the inbound. The fact that you get another inbound means the violation was harmless. We now have a responsiblity to take care of that arrow. Basketball is really a simple game. If you don't understand the game, don't monkey with the rules or try to defend a rule that makes no sense. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Wow this is better than an afternoon soap..... OS you have proven yet once again you really don't get it. Congratulations, I would rarely add to one of your idiotic posts but can't resist.
For anyone who cares the answer has been posted repeatedly by competent and knowledgable officials. One violation results after a legal touch (slap the ball which then goes OB), the other violation is an illegal touch (kicked ball). The APTI is retained by the team throwing in the ball should the illegal touch be committed by a defender. Otherwise the APTI has ended and the arrow gets reversed. I hope I am interpreting what everyone other than OS is saying correctly. |
Quote:
|
Old School :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.
M&M Guy: So, are you saying kicking the ball is good defense? Old School: No, I am not but what does the kick ball have to do with the AP. Later…… Old School: 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? Later…… Old School: “If I can prevent an easy score, I'm kicking the ball. Another example; if we got a 3 on 1 fast break and I kick the ball as the lone defensive player back. I just broke up a fast break bucket! That's great defense! That's an athletic and intelligent play” Maybe OS has a future in broadcasting. Especially if you throw in (no pun intended) the space shuttle stories and losing money in the bank! :D |
Quote:
Quote:
Now, let's go to your other example - as you're walking out the door of the bank with your crisp, new $100 bill, you lose it, before you even get past the guard. Would you still owe the bank? Yep; what happens after the loan is complete has nothing to do with the loan process. The same with the APTI - once the APTI is complete, by rule, what happens after that has nothing to do with the APTI. If the player touches it, legally, in-bounds, then the arrow switches, and what happens after that (the ball going OOB) has nothing to do with the arrow. Quote:
|
What about if team A throws an inbounds pass that is not touched by any player, and the ball goes out of bounds? Team B would get the throw-in for the OOB violation, but would team A keep the arrow, since the APTI was never legally touched inbounds? That is the only other example I can think of where team B could not do anything wrong while playing defense, and still not get the arrow for the next AP. Of course, I'm not sure if that is what would happen.
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:51am. |