Alternating Possession Debate

[Refsmitty]

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?

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Refsmitty

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?

[Refsmitty]

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

[Raymond]

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".

[Refsmitty]

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

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Refsmitty

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

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

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Refsmitty

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

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

[stiffler3492]

Originally Posted by Refsmitty

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

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.

[Adam]

Isn't there a case play on this?

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Isn't there a case play on this?

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

[zm1283]

Originally Posted by Refsmitty

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

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

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by zm1283

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

Pull out the rule book and show it to him.

[APG]

Originally Posted by Refsmitty

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?

Case book play 4.42.5 is this exact play.

[BillyMac]

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Case book play 4.42.5 is this exact play.

4.42.5 SITUATION: Team A is awarded an alternating-possession throw-in.
A1’s throw-in pass is illegally kicked by B2. RULING: As a result of B2’s kicking
violation, Team A is awarded a new throw-in at the designated spot nearest to
where the kicking violation (illegal touching) occurred. Since the alternating-possession
throw-in had not been contacted legally, the throw-in has not ended and
therefore, the arrow remains with Team A for the next alternating-possession
throw-in. COMMENT: The kicking violation ends the alternating-possession
throw-in and as a result, a non-alternating-possession throw-in is administered.
When the ball is legally touched on the subsequent throw-in following the kicking
violation, the arrow shall not be changed and shall remain with Team A.