Q#34 Resumption of Play

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

From the Answer Key, the correct answer is "TRUE" and the rules references are 7-5-1 & 8-1-2.

Logic seems to point this way. Other wise it would simply be another delay of game infraction (one violation, then a T) and would be listed under there. A team would never get a second violation, which they do.

But where I am struggling is to find how 7.5.1.C could even happen if there is no carryover to another situation. It could only happen if we ignore the word "MAKE" in the sentence "Following a violation by one team only, if that team continues to delay when authorized to MAKE a throw in...". Under this section how is is possible for team A to violate, Team B NOT violate (because that would be subsection D), and team A get another throw in in the same situation?

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by KSRef07

Logic seems to point this way. Other wise it would simply be another delay of game infraction (one violation, then a T) and would be listed under there. A team would never get a second violation, which they do.

But where I am struggling is to find how 7.5.1.C could even happen if there is no carryover to another situation. It could only happen if we ignore the word "MAKE" in the sentence "Following a violation by one team only, if that team continues to delay when authorized to MAKE a throw in...". Under this section how is is possible for team A to violate, Team B NOT violate (because that would be subsection D), and team A get another throw in in the same situation?

I see your point. I think it's just a bad wording again.

My personal opinion is that the entire rule book should be completely re-written. But I'm not volunteering.

[rainmaker]

Okay, plowing around a little, here's a comment in the case book after 7.5.1
COMMENT: Each different time a team has delayed returning to the court after a time-out or between quarters, the resumption-of-play procedure should be used. Hwever, if a team refuses to play after [T's] have been assessed, the game may be forfeited."

But that's last year's book. Maybe it's different this year.

Edited to add: Dexter beat me to it. sheez...

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by rainmaker

Okay, plowing around a little, here's a comment in the case book after 7.5.1
COMMENT: Each different time a team has delayed returning to the court after a time-out or between quarters, the resumption-of-play procedure should be used. Hwever, if a team refuses to play after [T's] have been assessed, the game may be forfeited."

But that's last year's book. Maybe it's different this year.

Nope, the COMMENT in the case play is still the same in this year's book..

[rainmaker]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, the COMMENT in the case play is still the same in this year's book..

Okay, well, at least I got this answer right. One out of three. So much for my test score this year.