New "AP Legal Touch" Rule/Different Interpretation

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by bronco

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.

Bronco, don't forget about 6-4-5, where if the throw-in team violates, they also lose the arrow. Throwing the ball directly OOB without touching a player is a throw-in violation.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by bronco

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.

Bronco, throwing the ball directly out of bounds on a throw-in is a violation. If the throwing team commits any violation during the throw-in, they lose the ball and the arrow. That's always been the rule.

I know that it's easy to get confused with all the nonsense that Old School keeps throwing in. It's best to simply ignore anything in his posts pertaining to rules.

[M&M Guy]

You're slow.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

You're slow.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

I was hoping you would post that. I need a good, middle-of-the-afternoon pick-up.

[mick]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports
say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you
make," -- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.

[Old School]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Ok, I'll play along. This statement is correct, and a good example of my point. What if you sit down at the banker's desk, sign all the paperwork, get the free toaster and monogrammed pen, and they forget to hand you the $100. Do you still owe them? Of course not; just because most of the qualifications of a loan have been met, doesn't mean all of them have been met. The same thing applies to the rules on a throw-in: the ball is handed to the player for a TI, and the ball is passed unto the playing court. Most of the qualifications have been met, but not all. What's missing? The legal touch by a player in-bounds. That's what ends the APTI. A kick is not a legal touch, therefore the APTI hasn't ended.

Hold the phone! There end lies the issue once again. If I start something, it has to end. We do not defer penality's, violations, or any results. Name somewhere else where we do this in the rules. We got into this situation with a held ball/jump ball. If we want to be fair each APTI afterwards needs to have en ending. We don't defer it to another held/jump ball. If it's kick, then we inbound again, APTI not complete.

I notice how nobody wants to comment on kicking the ball after a made bucket doesn't take away running the endline privildege. We need to do the same thing here, but I don't write the rules, I just enforce them.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old School

Hold the phone!

I notice how nobody wants to comment on kicking the ball after a made bucket doesn't take away running the endline privildege. We need to do the same thing here, but I don't write the rules, I just enforce them.

Hold the phone! You're agreeing with me! Yes, finally!

The kicked ball after a made bucket means the TI was not completed, therefore the team gets to do it again, complete with the endline priviledge.

Just like a kicked ball during a APTI means the TI was not completed, so they get to do it again, complete with keeping the arrow.

So, what was your question again?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by mick

"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports
say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you
make," -- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.

Mick - have you got any cookies with any strong ingredients? I might need those before the afternoon's done.

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by mick

"A cookie store is a bad idea. Besides, the market research reports
say America likes crispy cookies, not soft and chewy cookies like you
make," -- Response to Debbi Fields' idea of starting Mrs. Fields' Cookies.

"Around the clock? Sports all the time? That's never gonna work! Sportscenter? Think about it - that's just dumb." -- Ron Burgundy

[Old School]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Hold the phone! You're agreeing with me! Yes, finally!

The kicked ball after a made bucket means the TI was not completed, therefore the team gets to do it again, complete with the endline priviledge.

Just like a kicked ball during a APTI means the TI was not completed, so they get to do it again, complete with keeping the arrow.

So, what was your question again?

Okay, now we are starting to get there. Key word here is they get to do it again on the endline play. The issue is resolved right then and there. There is no deferring it for another held/jump ball that could occur 10 minutes later. The possession needs to be determined now just like the endbound priviledge was retained for the inbound now. At some point in time, the ball is going to be legally touched or a foul oocurs.

I'm a little concerned about the direction the rulemakers is trying to go with the rules here. I can see a can of worms about to be unleashed if this rule passes. Deferring rules, successive APTI, normal violations that turn into double jeopardy, oh my.....what's the world coming too!

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

I notice how nobody wants to comment on kicking the ball after a made bucket doesn't take away running the endline privildege. We need to do the same thing here, but I don't write the rules, I just enforce them.

Whatinthehell has this got to do with AP throw-ins. It's completely irrelevant.

And how can you enforce what you don't know?

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old School

Okay, now we are starting to get there. Key word here is they get to do it again on the endline play. The issue is resolved right then and there. There is no deferring it for another held/jump ball that could occur 10 minutes later.

Yes, so what is your point? The AP arrow is, by nature, for a throw-in in the future. After the initial jump ball to start the game, team A gets first possesion, and the arrow will be pointed to team B. It could point to team B all game long if we have the right situations happen. So what?

Originally Posted by Old School

The possession needs to be determined now just like the endbound priviledge was retained for the inbound now.

It is. The posession is a TI for the kicking violation. It is determined right at that instant. What is your point?

Originally Posted by Old School

At some point in time, the ball is going to be legally touched or a foul oocurs.

Cool, let's examine this. A1 has the ball for a APTI. While he's holding the ball, B1 holds A2 inbounds, trying to keep A2 from getting open. A is not yet in the bonus. What happens, and why?

Originally Posted by Old School

Deferring rules, successive APTI, normal violations that turn into double jeopardy, oh my.....what's the world coming too!

Nothing, because none of this is happening, except in your mind.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

I can see a can of worms about to be unleashed if this rule passes. Deferring rules, successive APTI, normal violations that turn into double jeopardy, oh my.....what's the world coming too!

The rule has already been passed, *****. That's what people have been trying to tell you.

What you want to do is completely different than what the rule already says you have to do.

You mentioned "null and void" before. You should change your posting name to that, JMO. It's certainly apt.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

The kicked ball after a made bucket means the TI was not completed, therefore the team gets to do it again, complete with the endline priviledge.

Just like a kicked ball during a APTI means the TI was not completed, so they get to do it again, complete with keeping the arrow.

So, what was your question again?

Okay, this works for me and I'm not sure why I didn't catch it before. So, while I may prefer my way, I'm much more ok with the way it is now. Why? Simple, consistency. The FED has determined that a team entitled to a throw-in gets to see that throw-in to the end.

Now, I may as well be arguing that ball handlers should be allowed 6 seconds rather than 5.