Possesion Arrow Error

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Let me go on the record on this one too from a rules standpoint.

-the awarding of a throw-in to the wrong team was an is an official's error
-as soon as the official administering the throw-in gave the thrower the ball, the ball became live(rule 6-1-2b)
-the throw-in ended when a V player on the court legally touched the ball(rule 4-42-5a)
- the 3-point shot counts because it was made with a live ball ( rule 5-1-1)

Once the throw-in ended, it was too late to change anything, including giving the wrong team the ball for the throw-in(case book play 6.4.1SitD) or voiding the made 3-point shot. You administer the 2 free throws for the technical foul on the H coach and give the V the ball for the throw-in.

And if anyone disagrees with that, please cite RULES to support your stance.

This is a technical foul situation, and clearly has nothing to do with 6.4.1D.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

This is a technical foul situation, and clearly has nothing to do with 6.4.1D.

Nope, it's a question of whether the throw-in was legal or not. Case book play 6.4.1D states it was a legal throw-in and can't be changed, even though the throw-in was made in error. And the ONLY technical foul called in post #6 was the one called on the H coach AFTER the made 3-point shot.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Nope, it's a question of whether the throw-in was legal or not. Case book play 6.4.1D states it was a legal throw-in and can't be changed, even though the throw-in was made in error. And the ONLY technical foul called in post #6 was the one called on the H coach AFTER the made 3-point shot.

The coach didn't do anything after the shot. How is the foul after the shot?

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The coach didn't do anything after the shot. How is the foul after the shot?

You might want to go back and read post #6......

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

You might want to go back and read post #6......

If the technical was called for what the coach said at that point, the shot should count. My understanding what that the technical was for the preceding act of apparent deception for his team to get the throw-in. I actually have a problem with this theory.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

My understanding what that the technical was for the preceding act of apparent deception for his team to get the throw-in. I actually have a problem with this theory.

JAR, see post #6. There was NO technical foul called before the made shot for an apparent deception to get an unwarranted throw-in. If someone wants to call a "T" for that AFTER the made shot, fine. You do have rules backing to do so. What there is absolutely NO rules backing for though is for anyone to retoactively call an unsporting "T" and then go back and void either the throw-in or the made 3-pointer. You can't retroactively make a ball that was legally live dead, as Camron is trying to claim(I think).

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

JAR, see post #6. There was NO technical foul called before the made shot for an apparent deception to get an unwarranted throw-in. If someone wants to call a "T" for that AFTER the made shot, fine. You do have rules backing to do so. What there is absolutely NO rules backing for though is for anyone to retoactively call an unsporting "T" and then go back and void either the throw-in or the made 3-pointer. You can't retroactively make a ball that was legally live dead, as Camron is trying to claim(I think).

That's exactly what happens in 10.1.8. I realize the difference in the two situations, but the foul is "actually called" after the fact in both. If the shot is waved off in one, why would it not be waved off in the other?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The coach didn't do anything after the shot. How is the foul after the shot?

Gee, maybe because that's when the ONLY foul that was called in in post #6 was actually called?

[Cobra]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Gee, maybe because that's when the ONLY foul that was called in in post #6 was actually called?

No one cares what post #6 says. No one is talking about that. Please stop pointing out what post #6 says because it doesn't matter.

[rockyroad]

Originally Posted by Cobra

No one cares what post #6 says. No one is talking about that. Please stop pointing out what post #6 says because it doesn't matter.

What the hell??? Post #6 is exactly what we are talking about...the statements were made that the 3 point shot would not count because the Unsporting T - for deliberately making the throw-in that was not theirs - would somehow magically make the live ball dead before the shooter touched the throw-in. Even after the ball was shot and the basket made, we could cancel it because the T actually took place before the shot, even though it wasn't called. Those are the statements being made and they are based on the situation in post #6.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Cobra

No one cares what post #6 says. No one is talking about that. Please stop pointing out what post #6 says because it doesn't matter.

Reading is fundamental. Post #6 is the exact play that Camron is talking about.

[just another ref]

Originally Posted by Jurassic Referee

Gee, maybe because that's when the ONLY foul that was called in in post #6 was actually called?

The ball is not dead when the foul is "actually called." The ball is dead when
"A foul, other than player- or team-control occurs." 6-7-7

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally Posted by just another ref

The ball is not dead when the foul is "actually called." The ball is dead when
"A foul, other than player- or team-control occurs." 6-7-7

Um yeah. And can you find anywhere in the situation described in post #6 where a foul of ANY kind occurred BEFORE the made 3-pointer?