Possesion Arrow Error

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

Just had to stir it up didn't you

Hopefully the official blows the whistle immediately. If the shot was clearly in flight (has left the shooter's hands) before the whistle, then yes, I'm going to count the shot. Don't know of a rule that supports any other action....

If A2 had committed a personal foul just prior to the shot, and the whistle didn't blow until the shot was in the air, you'd cancel that based on 6-7-7. The TF "occurred" when A2 spouted off, not when the whistle blew.
Camron's point is that the TF "occurs" when the team purposefully takes a throwin to which they're not entitled.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

If A2 had committed a personal foul just prior to the shot, and the whistle didn't blow until the shot was in the air, you'd cancel that based on 6-7-7. The TF "occurred" when A2 spouted off, not when the whistle blew.
Camron's point is that the TF "occurs" when the team purposefully takes a throwin to which they're not entitled.

Snaq,

I understand Cam's point, but the case play he referenced applies only to action immediately after a made basket, not after an intervening TO. The difference is when the ball becomes live. In the case play, the ball never became live after the made basket because it was never at the disposal of a player from B for a throw-in. The T is actually for A preventing the ball from being promptly made live per 10-1-5-b.

By contrast, in the OP situation, the ball became live when handed to the player from A for the throw-in. It's an official's error and by rule can't be corrected after the throw-in ends.

Bottom line is the officials screwed the pooch if they let A have the ball instead of B following the TO. This is not a correctable error according to the 2002-2003 interp cited by JR. This is why the officials should always get together in these situations (TO after made basket) and confirm who gets the ball and where they get it.


In your new situation, timing is the issue. If the whistle for the T and the try occurred right on top of each other, then I can and would easily sell disallowing the try. But if there's a big delay between the try and the whistle, I can probably still sell it, but it's going to be a whole lot harder to do. That's why I said I hoped the whistle was immediate. There are times when a patient whistle is a good thing, but this isn't one of them.

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

Snaq,

I understand Cam's point, but the case play he referenced applies only to action immediately after a made basket, not after an intervening TO. The difference is when the ball becomes live. In the case play, the ball never became live after the made basket because it was never at the disposal of a player from B for a throw-in. The T is actually for A preventing the ball from being promptly made live per 10-1-5-b.

By contrast, in the OP situation, the ball became live when handed to the player from A for the throw-in. It's an official's error and by rule can't be corrected after the throw-in ends.

Bottom line is the officials screwed the pooch if they let A have the ball instead of B following the TO. This is not a correctable error according to the 2002-2003 interp cited by JR. This is why the officials should always get together in these situations (TO after made basket) and confirm who gets the ball and where they get it.


In your new situation, timing is the issue. If the whistle for the T and the try occurred right on top of each other, then I can and would easily sell disallowing the try. But if there's a big delay between the try and the whistle, I can probably still sell it, but it's going to be a whole lot harder to do. That's why I said I hoped the whistle was immediate. There are times when a patient whistle is a good thing, but this isn't one of them.

You're right about the case play, i think Camron was simply using it as inspiration to deal with this. Looking at 6-7-7, though, he's right if you deem taking the throw-in to be a technical foul. The ball is dead from the point of action that is deemed a foul.

You're right, it's a tough sell after the ball goes in.

If I'm thinking that quickly, though, I'm whistling B1 for a tech for crossing the OOB plain during a throw-in and touching the ball.

[TimTaylor]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

.... Looking at 6-7-7, though, he's right if you deem taking the throw-in to be a technical foul. .

This is what I think would be almost impossible to justify - especially if the official makes the mistake by handing B1 the ball. Even at that, the officials can still correct it if they do so before the throw-in ends. But after the fact? How do we prove intent? It would be a very very difficult T to justify.

If I'm thinking that quickly, though, I'm whistling B1 for a tech for crossing the OOB plain during a throw-in and touching the ball.

Or just use 10-1-5-b "preventing the ball from being promptly made live".

Administering official says "A ball", then B1 steps OOB & tries to take the ball for throw-in. I have no problem with an immediate T for this.......

[Adam]

Originally Posted by TimTaylor

This is what I think would be almost impossible to justify - especially if the official makes the mistake by handing B1 the ball. Even at that, the officials can still correct it if they do so before the throw-in ends. But after the fact? How do we prove intent? It would be a very very difficult T to justify.



Or just use 10-1-5-b "preventing the ball from being promptly made live".

Administering official says "A ball", then B1 steps OOB & tries to take the ball for throw-in. I have no problem with an immediate T for this.......

I agree on both counts. I would counter that if A is slow coming out, B isn't delaying anything by pulling this, so it's hard to justify 10-1-5b. Also, we don't have to "prove" anything. We aren't a court of law, so there's no presumption of innocence. That said, it would have to be pretty obvious to me to make that call. If thinking fast enough, I'd likely go with a DoG warning (T if he touches the ball).