Hope springs eternal ;)

As you know, that sounds better in Latin. ;)

POI is greater than AP
 

I recently had a MS coaching friend of mine ask me about POI vs AP. His understanding of each was that they were simply two different methods of putting the ball in play. And the only way to determine which to use was to memorize, by rule, when to use each.

He was wrong and I think my explanation helped him understand it. I hope I use the correct words and can convey that idea here.

There are certain situations that will always be AP because the POI will always give us an AP situation. They are listed in 6-4-3(a,b,c and f).

In 6-4-3(d,e,and g) we are given the situations that may or may not have an obvious POI to put the ball back in play. The situations that give us an obvious POI in (d) are when there is a FT to follow (as in multiple FT's) and when there is Throw-in to follow the attempt (as in a techincal FT). The situations that give us an obvious POI in (e & g) are a goal, an infraction, the end of a quarter/extra period. If none of these exist we go to AP.

So to sum it up, we would always go POI if it were possible. It is not so we we have to go AP sometimes and the criteria for that is spelled out in 6-4-3.

I'm sure there are holes in my explanation. But basically, AP only exists to put the ball in play to start 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters and to put the ball in play when there isn't an obvious POI as described in 6-4-3.

Now, let the hole poking begin!

The definition of POI includes AP as a last resort. There are certain situations, however, that go AP by rule rather than POI. Simultaneous FT violation, non-throwin lodged in the rim, held balls, new quarters. For some of these, it doesn't make a difference (rim lodge and Simultaneous FT violation); for others (held balls), it might.

Exactly! Think of it this way: going to the AP arrow is the means of last resort - you only use it if none of the other conditions fit. As BITS, Nevadaref, Bob & others have pointed out, a double foul that occurs during a throw-in or try which results in a throw-in (i.e. successful attempt of last free throw) clearly falls under the POI rule. Don't over analyze it.......

Am I missing any situations that go AP by rule rather than POI when I say they are listed in 6-4-3(a,b,c & f) and to start 2nd, 3rd and 4th quarters?

Edited: This is a legitimate question and not intended to bait anyone. I fear I am missing a situation that ruins my whole thought process.

I knew you had friends out there:)

No, I think you got it.

Thanks again guys! Getting ready to head to the game now...gonna have to bring a snickers bar since I was wrong, we didnt even bet, but I figure I owe him something,lol. Ill def be looking back to the explainations for Mondays meeting!~