New "AP Legal Touch" Rule/Different Interpretation

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old School

There you have it. I rest my case. The rules committe didn't want to put A at a disadvantage on the EL-TI, however, the same committee has put B at an even bigger disadvantage by allowing A to have multiple successive APTI, after they where given the ball back for the same TI.

Wrong.

A is not getting mutliple APTI's, because the original one never ended. They are not getting the ball back for the same TI, they're getting the ball for a different TI.

Originally Posted by Old School

A has not lost the right to throw in the ball and they have not lost the arrow. However, because B kicked the ball, they now lose the next held/jump ball. Think about that before you respond.

Ok, I thought about it.

B is not losing the next APTI. A has the next one because the A's hasn't finished. As soon as A's is finished, B will get the next one. Those are the rules. We should follow the rules, right?

Originally Posted by Old School

If I'm B, I'm not kicking the ball, in fact, just let them get it in so we don't lose the next APTI.

Excellent idea. In fact, if B should never kick the ball. It's a violation of the rules of basketball. If B kicks the ball, they get penalized. What's your point?

Originally Posted by Old School

My answer to this question is A has not lost the APTI. They still have the ball, which is all the APTI can give you is the ball for the TI, plus they still have the arrow because, remember, the touch was not legal. I am in the party that thinks the APTI should NOT guarantee you a successful TI.

Ok, this may be the closest you've had to a reasonable statement. You're finally starting to communicate. So, let's go with this. If getting the APTI should not guarantee you a successful TI, when do you propose the arrow should switch? As soon as you call the held ball? As soon as A1 steps OOB to throw it in? As soon as you hand it to A1? As soon as it's released?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by M&M Guy

Wrong.

A is not getting mutliple APTI's, because the original one never ended. They are not getting the ball back for the same TI, they're getting the ball for a different TI.

And because the original one never ended, and the ball was not legally touched (remember). We're still under the original or same AP. Just like the ELTI was retained. I really don't understand what's so difficult to understand about that.

Ok, this may be the closest you've had to a reasonable statement. You're finally starting to communicate. So, let's go with this. If getting the APTI should not guarantee you a successful TI, when do you propose the arrow should switch? As soon as you call the held ball? As soon as A1 steps OOB to throw it in? As soon as you hand it to A1? As soon as it's released?

I will go with the current rule, as soon as it is legally touched with the caviet, if it is kicked, the AP stays the same until the next legal touch of the ball. This way, the balance of fair play is preserved.

Go back and reread my example if this situation should occur with the old jump ball toss procedure. I just don't understandwhat the rulemakers are up to here, but I know it's not for today. This is a move to get them in position to make another more outlandish move, imho. Don't know when, but I know it's coming.....

[M&M Guy]

Originally Posted by Old School

And because the original one never ended, and the ball was not legally touched (remember). We're still under the original or same AP. Just like the ELTI was retained. I really don't understand what's so difficult to understand about that.

Again, the ELTI was not automatically retained. Please read rule 7-5-7, and tell me where it is.

Originally Posted by Old School

I will go with the current rule, as soon as it is legally touched with the caviet, if it is kicked, the AP stays the same until the next legal touch of the ball. This way, the balance of fair play is preserved.

You've been saying all along it is not fair. What changed your mind?

[Kelvin green]

I have to laugh at the utter nonsense on this thread.

The change in the rule only makes it consistent with everything else! DUH

If A has the ball for AP and there is a foul before the throw-in has ended the ARROW stays with A. (Read this B cammot foul to gain advantage of the arrow) now it is the same with any other illegal action

OS's logic has been lost on me!

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Kelvin green

I have to laugh at the utter nonsense on this thread.

The change in the rule only makes it consistent with everything else! DUH

If A has the ball for AP and there is a foul before the throw-in has ended the ARROW stays with A. (Read this B cammot foul to gain advantage of the arrow) now it is the same with any other illegal action

OS's logic has been lost on me!

It is illegal for me to throw the ball OOB, whether I kick it, hit it with my fist, with my hand, or with my head. It is all illegal. Why does kicking the ball have the extra lose the arrow penality attached to it, when the others don't? The penality for the others is the same as the kick ball penality, and perhaps the biggest flaw to me, is that the offense retains the right to inbound the ball, anyway.

You have to view this procedure with the old jumpball toss procedure to understand that something wrong has happened here. We have circumvented the rule to something that was not the original intentions of the changing this ruke in the first place. Maybe it just takes an experienced eye to see it, but guaranteed, you make a chance like that to fuel lodge of the space shuttle, changing the way it was originally designed to work, it's going to explore on takeoff.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by Old School

It is illegal for me to throw the ball OOB, whether I kick it, hit it with my fist, with my hand, or with my head. It is all illegal.

Gee, what a surprise. You're wrong again.

It is not illegal to throw the ball OOB by kicking or fisting it. The ball is dead as soon as it's kicked or hit with the fist. There is nothing illegal with throwing a dead ball OOB after that unless you want to call a "T" for delay of game.

You just simply don't understand the basics of officiating, do you? Unfortunately, that doesn't stop you from embarrassing yourself over and over though.

Silly monkey.....

[rainmaker]

Look, OS. Say A1 releases the ball onto the court, and B1 slaps at the ball with his hand, and effectively stops the ball in the air, so that it drops to the ground and rolls slowly oob. That touch is legal, and now the APTI is finished, and the arrow switches, while the ball is rolling. In fact, the clock starts and should run during the rolling of the ball. because the throw-in was completed, the ball is live, and play is going forward.

B1 has caused the ball to go oob, and that is a violation yes, but only one violation. The penalty for that violation is that A gets the ball oob again. The arrow is not affected by the oob, because the APTI ended as soon as the ball was touched with the hand, and while the ball is rolling there isn't a violation to consider.

This is also true if B1 whacks the ball hard, and it flies oob, although it doesn't take very long. The touch was legal, the throw-in completed, the arrow switched, and THEN the violation is committed. See? If someone else jumps in and catches the ball that B1 batted, so that it stays in play, there is no violation. The violation isn't in touching the ball, but in the oob.

Now suppose that A1 releases the ball onto the court, and B1 kicks the ball. At the moment the foot touches, the violation is committed, and the ball is dead. Where the ball goes after that is irrelevant. Now the penalty for the kick is that A gets the ball for a throw-in. Even if someone jumps in and catches the ball that B1 kicked it doesn't matter. The violation was committed at the moment of contact, and the throw in wasn't completed.

The not-switching-the-arrow thing is not the penalty for the kick. The new throw in is. The no-switching-the-arrow thing is simply because the throw-in was never completed. There's still only one penalty for the kick and that's A getting the ball for a throw-in.

The penalty for B causing the ball to go oob in the first case, and for B kicking the ball in the second case is the same -- A gets the ball for a throw-in. No one "takes the arrow away" from B. They simply don't get it if they kick the ball, because the APTI wasn't completed. It's the same thing that would happen if B committed a foul during A's APTI. The penalty is for the foul, and the arrow isn't switched. A keeps the arrow, but not because B fouled. It's because the APTI wasn't completed. Why is that so hard to understand?

[Old School]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Gee, what a surprise. You're wrong again.

It is not illegal to throw the ball OOB by kicking or fisting it. The ball is dead as soon as it's kicked or hit with the fist. There is nothing illegal with throwing a dead ball OOB after that unless you want to call a "T" for delay of game.

You just simply don't understand the basics of officiating, do you? Unfortunately, that doesn't stop you from embarrassing yourself over and over though.

Silly monkey.....

Okay Master Silly Monkey, I will give you that it is not illegal to throw the ball OOB. However, it is a violation, duhhhh...silly monkey, and a violation is an illegal act. Perhaps your understanding of the basics, goes beyond normal officiating, which I will openly admit, I don't care to that extent. However, I do care to understand what the penalty is, and the penalty for heaven's sake is the same no matter which way the freaking ball goes OOB, so whether you believe it is or isn't is mute, which is something I recommend you do with your mouth, on occasion. You know, just pass on the hyperbole.

We all get it....we all get that you have to be right and everybody else is wrong. We all get it...now, relax!