Thrower-in delay

[youngref33]

Thanks for the info guys!

[Adam]

Originally Posted by youngref33

Thanks for the info guys!

This does not, imo, refer to a player who takes a second to come back in.

[26 Year Gap]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

This does not, imo, refer to a player who takes a second to come back in.

It is the guy who is by the lane line and then pops back in near the arc that should draw the whistle. But it should be a violation, not a technical. I hope that turns up in the survey this year, and they (the rules committee) address it rather than more sleeve drama.

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by 26 Year Gap

It is the guy who is by the lane line and then pops back in near the arc that should draw the whistle. But it should be a violation, not a technical. I hope that turns up in the survey this year, and they (the rules committee) address it rather than more sleeve drama.

+1. We can hope they treat it like the "swinging elbows" that was not called when it was a T, so they changed it to a violation.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

+1. We can hope they treat it like the "swinging elbows" that was not called when it was a T, so they changed it to a violation.

Yet, they allow for a "swinging elbows" violation, by the shooter's teammate, to kill a shot - see 9.13.1, which seems terribly inconsistent.
So, if the teammate swings elbows and makes contact, the ball isn't dead until the attempt has ended, but if there's no contact, the ball is immediately dead, and cannot count. Weird!

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Yet, they allow for a "swinging elbows" violation, by the shooter's teammate, to kill a shot - see 9.13.1, which seems terribly inconsistent.
So, if the teammate swings elbows and makes contact, the ball isn't dead until the attempt has ended, but if there's no contact, the ball is immediately dead, and cannot count. Weird!

That's a different issue, but I agree with you.

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Yet, they allow for a "swinging elbows" violation, by the shooter's teammate, to kill a shot - see 9.13.1, which seems terribly inconsistent.
So, if the teammate swings elbows and makes contact, the ball isn't dead until the attempt has ended, but if there's no contact, the ball is immediately dead, and cannot count. Weird!

Just a like a violation by the offense during an AP throw-in will cause the arrow to change but a foul by the offense will not.

[Loudwhistle2]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

Just a like a violation by the offense during an AP throw-in will cause the arrow to change but a foul by the offense will not.

Can someone point me to where I can find this foul situation to be true. I thought the offense loses the arrow when they foul on an AP throwin?

Thanks

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by Rob1968

Yet, they allow for a "swinging elbows" violation, by the shooter's teammate, to kill a shot - see 9.13.1, which seems terribly inconsistent.
So, if the teammate swings elbows and makes contact, the ball isn't dead until the attempt has ended, but if there's no contact, the ball is immediately dead, and cannot count. Weird!

Wierd AND uncommon. I've yet to see a swinging elbows violation by a player that didn't have the ball.

[Rob1968]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

Wierd AND uncommon. I've yet to see a swinging elbows violation by a player that didn't have the ball.

Nor have I. The inconsistency of the penalties, in seeming inverse proportion to the acts, is curious. It goes to the conversations ln the Forum regarding poor wording of rule changes.