Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 648653)

Actually, it does. The point that I was trying to make is that the touching by the player whether he is inbounds or out of bounds is a legal touching. It is the location of that touching which is illegal and the cause of the violation. This is very different from the first contact being a kick or punch of the ball.

The reason that this concept is relevant to the clock/timing rules is that in 2007-08 the NFHS added the word "legally" to BOTH the rule on how a throw-in ends (4-42-5) AND the rule when the clock starts following a throw-in (5-9-4).

As we know this was done primarily because of the AP arrow. By adding the word "legally" to 4-42-5, the NFHS made it so that an illegal touch (kick, fist, etc.) did not cause the throw-in to end, and thus would not reverse the arrow. By adding the word "legally" the NFHS also made it so that the clock would not start in these situations. However, on a legal touching the throw-in ends, the arrow is reversed, and the clock would start as that is exactly what the wording of the rule says.

That same season the NFHS published a few play rulings to clarify what constituted legal touchings and what did not. It was made clear that a player standing OOB and touching the ball in an otherwise legal manner (not kicking it or striking it with a fist) had contacted the ball "legally" causing the throw-in to end and committed an OOB violation. This was the play ruling which I cited for the two of you. With it I was making the point to you that if one follows the logic behind the NFHS rulings, one will conclude that the clock does not start on illegal touchings, but does on legal touchings. Therefore, although play may be immediately whistled dead and the clock stopped, it still should be started on the touch.

In short, if you would reverse the arrow if the throw-in were an AP throw-in, then you should start the clock on the touching, but if the touching would prevent the AP arrow from being reversed, then the clock should not start on the play.

Originally Posted by Nevadaref (Post 648653)

Actually, it does. The point that I was trying to make is that the touching by the player whether he is inbounds or out of bounds is a legal touching. It is the location of that touching which is illegal and the cause of the violation. This is very different from the first contact being a kick or punch of the ball.

The reason that this concept is relevant to the clock/timing rules is that in 2007-08 the NFHS added the word "legally" to BOTH the rule on how a throw-in ends (4-42-5) AND the rule when the clock starts following a throw-in (5-9-4).

As we know this was done primarily because of the AP arrow. By adding the word "legally" to 4-42-5, the NFHS made it so that an illegal touch (kick, fist, etc.) did not cause the throw-in to end, and thus would not reverse the arrow. By adding the word "legally" the NFHS also made it so that the clock would not start in these situations. However, on a legal touching the throw-in ends, the arrow is reversed, and the clock would start as that is exactly what the wording of the rule says.

That same season the NFHS published a few play rulings to clarify what constituted legal touchings and what did not. It was made clear that a player standing OOB and touching the ball in an otherwise legal manner (not kicking it or striking it with a fist) had contacted the ball "legally" causing the throw-in to end and committed an OOB violation. This was the play ruling which I cited for the two of you. With it I was making the point to you that if one follows the logic behind the NFHS rulings, one will conclude that the clock does not start on illegal touchings, but does on legal touchings. Therefore, although play may be immediately whistled dead and the clock stopped, it still should be started on the touch.

In short, if you would reverse the arrow if the throw-in were an AP throw-in, then you should start the clock on the touching, but if the touching would prevent the AP arrow from being reversed, then the clock should not start on the play.

Originally Posted by tjchamp (Post 648555)

I do not believethat to be the correct reference to use. 9.2.2 would indicate that is a legal throw in, but the violation occurs because the player is now out of bounds.

I believe the correct rule to look at would be 9-2-3, which indicates the thrown ball shall not be touched by a teammate of the thrower while the ball is on the out-of-bounds side of the throw-in boundary-line plane (i.e. an illegal touch).

Originally Posted by Upward ref (Post 648895)

now we're back to where i came in, before it got way past me. As I try to get up tp speed on timers/clocks; can endline priveleges still be retained when talking about AP situations ?

Originally Posted by Back In The Saddle (Post 648903)

I think I understand your question, but I'm sure somebody will set me straight if I don't. I cannot think of any situation where an AP throw-in is not a designated spot throw-in. And I cannot think of any situation where a team is allow to run the baseline, something happens that results in an AP throw-in, and the team that gets the throw-in (which would have to be the original throwing team) is allowed to retain the privilege of running the end line.

So I'd have to say, no.