Alternating Possession Debate
 

Had a situation Tuesday - inbounds play - ball was kicked by defender before the ball legally touched player or court inbounds - therefore - throw end had not ended. My take is that by rule 4-42-5 the throw in team keeps the ball and the arrow - partner disagrees - what say you?

What was his reasoning? What did he say when you said the throw-in had not ended?

Reasoning
 

He thought the throw in ended when touched by the defender - even if touched illegally.

Smitty, I know you've been around here long enough to KNOW the answer to this one.

And it's not "what say you", it's "what does the rule book say". ;)

Sounds like he's answered his own question. The throw in ends when the ball is LEGALLY touched inbounds. The ball was not legally touched inbounds. Team B violated by kicking it. A gets a new throw in and keeps the arrow.

I'm not sure what to tell him then if he doesn't know when a throw-in ends.

Isn't there a case play on this?

Yes. I don't have my books with me, but I have seen it before.

Pull out the rule book and show it to him.

Thanks for the verification all
 

You are correct BNR - but when a vet argues with you it sometimes creates some self doubt.

Case book play 4.42.5 is this exact play.

When a vet argues with me it usually reassures me that I'm right. :D

I worked a jv boys game a couple years ago and stayed to watch a really varsity game worked by three veteran guys. Fourth quarter, illegal screen and the vets let the offenedd team shoot one and one. I tried to tell one of the vets from the end line that they were wrong, so did the furious coach. To no avail,both the coach and I lost. When I got home I sent all three a copy of the rule in a nice way and I got apologies from all three. :)

As I posted earlier today. Veteran official != official that knows the rules.

Maybe, but when they sound sure of themselves (which they usually do), they can sound convincing enough to create doubt.