Jump Ball then Technical

[Chess Ref]

Boys Varsity game. Three players on the floor in the key after a loose ball. I come in blowing whistle for a jump ball. Two of the players let up and the third gets in a cheap elbow swing. I know about ignoring minor contact during a dead ball but the last elbow swing was over the line and also hit the opposing player on the side of the head. So it needed to be addressed. I gave the player a technical.

I was a little unsure about handling the arrow so I fell back on administering the penalties in the order they occurred. So I had table switch the arrow, administered the free throws and took the ball out at the division line.

In hindsight should I have ignored the original jump ball ?

[jdmara]

Jump ball.......A technical foul occurs before the throw-in ends so you would not switch the arrow.

-Josh

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Chess Ref

Boys Varsity game. Three players on the floor in the key after a loose ball. I come in blowing whistle for a jump ball. Two of the players let up and the third gets in a cheap elbow swing. I know about ignoring minor contact during a dead ball but the last elbow swing was over the line and also hit the opposing player on the side of the head. So it needed to be addressed. I gave the player a technical.

I was a little unsure about handling the arrow so I fell back on administering the penalties in the order they occurred. So I had table switch the arrow, administered the free throws and took the ball out at the division line.

In hindsight should I have ignored the original jump ball ?

You were right, in theory. Penalize in the order. Since the AP throwin was never completed, though, you should not switch the arrow.

[Scrapper1]

Yeah, you should not have changed the arrow. Did you actually administer an AP throw-in? No. So, no change in the arrow.

Live and learn.

(Did the elbow-thrower get thrown? IOW, did you consider an elbow to the head to be flagrant?)

[Chess Ref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Yeah, you should not have changed the arrow. Did you actually administer an AP throw-in? No. So, no change in the arrow.

Live and learn.

(Did the elbow-thrower get thrown? IOW, did you consider an elbow to the head to be flagrant?)

No i didn't throw him. In hindsight I made the right decision by not throwing him.

Yea I knew I had a giddyup in regards to the AP arrow. In my defense this was the first time this particular sitch has occurred. I am generally pretty good about learning from my mistakes. Except around brews and wimmen.

[Caesar's Ghost]

The arrow only changes when the throw in is over. Since there was no throw in it could never be over and the arrow shoudnt change.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Caesar's Ghost

The arrow only changes when the throw in is over. Since there was no throw in it could never be over and the arrow shoudnt change.

Careful on your verbiage here. The throw-in doesn't actually have to occur for the arrow to switch. The arrow is switched when the AP throw-in is completed. The AP throw-in is completed when a legal throw-in is legally touched OR when the throw-in team violates.

You probably knew that, but talking about the throw-in being "over" is imprecise, and saying the arrow can't change because "there was no throw in" is confusing, at best.

[zm1283]

Yeah the arrow doesn't switch. My partners and I had a very similar situation last week in a boys varsity game. A1 drives down the lane, gets stripped, held ball happens. A1 thinks he was fouled so he mouths off in front of one of my partners. Partner T's him. Team B shoots the free throws and gets the ball at the division line. Arrow stays the same since we never had an AP throw-in.

[JugglingReferee]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

You were right, in theory. Penalize in the order. Since the AP throwin was never completed, though, you should not switch the arrow.

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Yeah, you should not have changed the arrow. Did you actually administer an AP throw-in? No. So, no change in the arrow.

Live and learn.

(Did the elbow-thrower get thrown? IOW, did you consider an elbow to the head to be flagrant?)

Both of these guys are correct.

Another approach is let's say that the foul (technical) was after the AP thrower-in had the ball, but before the throw-in was completed. The foul is penalized, but the arrow is not reversed.

In this situation, the AP throw-in is "further along the throw-in process", but the arrow is not changed, so it should not be changed in your OP as well.

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by JugglingReferee

Both of these guys are correct.

Another approach is let's say that the foul (technical) was after the AP thrower-in had the ball, but before the throw-in was completed. The foul is penalized, but the arrow is not reversed.

In this situation, the AP throw-in is "further along the throw-in process", but the arrow is not changed, so it should not be changed in your OP as well.

I could be totally wrong here, but isn't the ball live once the thrower has the ball for a throw-in? Wouldn't that mean that the foul would have to be flagrant or intentional and couldn't be a technical since the ball wasn't dead?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Careful on your verbiage here. The throw-in doesn't actually have to occur for the arrow to switch. The arrow is switched when the AP throw-in is completed. The AP throw-in is completed when a legal throw-in is legally touched OR when the throw-in team violates.

You probably knew that, but talking about the throw-in being "over" is imprecise, and saying the arrow can't change because "there was no throw in" is confusing, at best.

I agree with CG.

The throw-in ENDS when the ball is legally touched inbounds or the throwing team violates. 4-42-5

His use of the word "over" is synonymous with the use of the word "ends."

BTW could you please give me an instance in which the throw-in does not occur, yet the arrow switches?

[Nevadaref]

Originally Posted by zm1283

I could be totally wrong here, but isn't the ball live once the thrower has the ball for a throw-in? Wouldn't that mean that the foul would have to be flagrant or intentional and couldn't be a technical since the ball wasn't dead?

I believe that by writing "foul (technical)" Jugs was allowing for either case.

Afterall, an individual could get a technical foul for some noncontact act before the throw-in ends. The foul doesn't have to be a personal foul; although that is certainly more likely, but not necessary.

[mbyron]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

BTW could you please give me an instance in which the throw-in does not occur, yet the arrow switches?

Between the 2nd and 3rd quarters.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by Nevadaref

His use of the word "over" is synonymous with the use of the word "ends."

I agree that's what he meant. But the rulebook never talks (to my knowledge) of a throw-in being "over", so that -- to me -- was kind of ambiguous. It could mean:

1) the throw-in ends, in the rulebook sense; or
2) a throw-in pass was touched legally.

I just wanted to clarify that the arrow can switch without #2 ever happening.

BTW could you please give me an instance in which the throw-in does not occur, yet the arrow switches?

When the throw-in team violates.

I understand that the throw-in does happen, in the rulebook sense. But there was no throw-in pass. That's the only point I was trying -- unsuccessfully -- to make.

[Scrapper1]

Originally Posted by mbyron

Between the 2nd and 3rd quarters.

Hee-hee!! Much better than my answer above.