Did the rookies get this right?
 

I was helping train some rec league rookies last night at a 6th grade boys scrimmage. During an AP throw-in, the offensive team was called for an illegal screen while the inbounder was still holding the ball. The refs gave the ball to the other team for a throw-in but weren't sure whether or not to change the AP arrow. Later, almost the same thing happened during another AP throw-in but this time the inbounder stepped over the line prior to the throw-in for a violation. Again, they weren't sure what to do, if anything, with the AP arrow. In the first case, they finally decided to leave it alone. In the second case, they discussed it then changed it. Were they correct in either case?

2 for 2

Are you asking this as a question for rookies or yourself not sure?

Either way 6-4-5

They got it right. I had a defensive holding on an AP throw in where the home team was on defense. I know we all have our terrible table stories but they refused to keep the arrow for black. It was an under level game and we had to have the head coach for white tell the table to flip it. Later he told me he did not know if I was correct but "I sold the crap out of it." We laughed and I assured him it was correct and we moved on

The arrow is changed when the AP throw-in ends.

The throw-in ends when the ball is touched on the court, or the inbounding team violates.

The throw-in does NOT end on a foul.

So, the first throw-in did not end, and the arrow should not be changed.

The second throw-in did end, and the arrow should be changed.

Thanks for coming out, God bless & good night!

Impressed
 

This is impressive for two rookies to get this right. Two solid calls.

Yeah - one of them is a college freshman and the other a HS junior. They'll both be working a "competitive" MS program that starts next week. The assignor asked me to work with them last night and, overall, they both did a really good job. I worked one quarter with each of them, then let them work the second half together.

Oh yeah, neither of them called any reaches or over the backs. And yes, I made sure they both now know the first rule of officiating. :D

I think you meant...

The throw-in ends when the ball is LEGALLY touched, or the inbounding team violates.

A kick is not a legal touch and the throwin doesn't end on a kick. The arrow will be unchanged and the new throwin will be for the kick, not the AP.

Also, "on the court" has, at least in some contexts, been interpreted to be inbounds (see LGP rules). An OOB player touching the released throwin will have violated but it is not a throwin violation. That is considered to be a legal throwin that has ended....then a OOB violation occurred....arrow changes.

The one that impressed me the most was when a throw-in went OOB without being touched and the rookie brought it back to the original spot for the throw-in. I know a few veterans who don't get this one right.

Correct on both counts.

Yeah, the probability of flipping a coin to get both calls right is just 0.25!

Hmmm...what if the kick is by the offensive team? Wouldn't that be a violation and therefore the arrow WOULD change since the inbounding team violated?

I always took that to mean a throw-in violation...not just any violation.

NCAA specifically says "throw-in violation." Don't have my FED books handy to check, but I think it is (or interpreted as) the same.

By the wording of the rule 6-4-5 it doesn't specify. This might be one of those intent instances that some of our leadership can shed some light on.

At this point, I'm going change of arrow and the next throw in for Team B is for the kick by Team A.

NFHS 4.42.5 (Emphasis mine)

The throw-in ends when:

(a) the passed ball touches or is legally touched by another player inbounds

(b) The passed ball touches ir is touched by another player out of bounds, except as in 7-5-7 [endline after score]

(c) The throw-in team commits a throw-in violation

You're correct. I didn't consider a kick by the offensive team. I was only thinking of the defensive team kicking the ball. The part about the throwin team violating is not restricted to throwin violations...but just violations.

RULE 6-4-5 . . . The opportunity to make an alternating-possession throw-in is lost if the throw-in team violates. (cut more on fouls)

While all violations end the throwin it doesn't limit the loss of the arrow to throwin violations..

You need to look in the right spot -- 4-throw-in (4-42?) and see when it ends. I'm "certain" it says "throw-in violation."

4-42-5, I put the text above. Throw-in violation only.

Thanks guys. I'm convinced.

4-42-5 is the secondary part of this ruling.

Team doesn't lose arrow, but they would lose throw-in privledge and Team B gets the ball for a kicking violation by Team A. No change in arrow.

I'm not sure what play you are referring to but I think you have this one wrong.

A/P throw-in for Team A. Player A1 commits a kicking violation. Team B gets a throw in for the violation. The arrow is reversed and pointed to Team B for the next A/P throw-in.

6.4.5A

Beautiful!

I learned something today.

Life is good.

Look at 6-4-4 and 4-42-5.

6-4-4 the direction of the possession arrow is reversed immediately after an alternating possession throw-in ends. An alternating-possession throw-in ends when the throw-in ends as in 4-42-5.

4-42-5 c. The throw-in team commits a throw-in violation.

Consequently, a kick ball by team A doesn't end Team A's alternating possession throw in. So they don't lose the arrow. They keep the arrow, but team B gets the throw-in for the kick ball violation.

6-4-5 The opportunity to make an alternating-possession throw-in is lost if the throw-in team violates.

As the other rules help us interpret what violations are being referred to, we can deduce from 4-42-5 c that it's only throw-in violations.

Case Book 6.4.5 Situation A.

4-42-5 tells us how a throw-in ends. If an A/P throw-in ends we reverse the arrow. But that is not the only time we reverse the arrow. 6-4-5 gives us another time. The Case Book play 6.4.5A even tells us that a violation by Team A during an A/P throw-in is the only way a team loses its turn under the procedure.

If the throw-in ends as described in 4-42-5 then they used their opportunity and they did not lose it. 6-4-5 is a way (and the only way) to lose the arrow without completing the throw-in.

The "violation" in 6.4.5A means a "throw-in violation" (5-seconds, stepping across the line, not passing the ball directly on the court, etc.).

It doesn't mean a kicking violation.

So, AP throw-in, A1 throws a throw-in pass. The pass is heading OOB and A2 is giving chase, he's left with the choice of letting it go OOB or kicking it. You're saying if he kicks it his team keeps the arrow?

Far fetched? Maybe, but it hardly seems like an intended advantage.

I don't agree.

6-4 are the rules addressing Alternating Possession.
4-42 are the rules addressing Throw-in, Thrower and Designated Spot.

4-42 does not address or have any bearing on when the Alternating Possession arrow is reversed. It only addresses the the items mentioned above. For the purposes of Alternating Possession, it does tell us when a throw-in ends. And a throw-in ends when the throw-in team commits a throw-in violation.

6-4 addresses how we are to handle the Alternating Possessions and when the Alternating Arrow is to be reversed. It has 2 articles that address this. 6-4-4 tells us that the arrow is reversed when the throw-in ends. If 6-4-5 didn't mean something other that 6-4-4, why would it be in the book. It would be redundant.

"Violation" is defined in 4-46. Throw-in violations are part of that definition as described in 9-2. But I don't believe the NF chose to write their rules by saying that we defined "violations" but as far as 6-4 goes only consider 9-2
and ignore 9-4. I do think 9-4 is the only violation that would likely happen during a throw-in, but it is very possible.

If 6-4-5 didn't mean any violation, why would 6.4.5A say: "A violation by Team A during an alternating-possession throw-in is the only way a team loses its turn under the procedure?" All of the ways that a throw-in ends would be a way that a team loses its turn under the procedure.

I am not convinced that 6-4-5 only refers to throw-in violations.

Edit: Since this thread has taken on a few scenarios, let me clarify: Team A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in. A violation (9-4 or any violation 9-1 thru 13) by Team B = no reversal of the alternating-possession arrow. A violation (9-4 or any violation 9-1 thru 13) by Team A = reversal of the alternating-possession arrow.

I've been instructed that it's ALL violations. Thinking about it, though, what kind of violations COULD you have here that aren't throw-in violations? Kicked ball, excessive elbow swinging (almost non-existent here), anything else?

Probably only 9-4 and 9-13. I am not very imaginative but like you, I think 9-13 (elbows) is very unlikely. But a kick or fist seems like it could happen.

I'm not being snarky. This is a serious question.
 

But they called an "illegal screen". What made it illegal?

Most likely a blocking foul.