POI or AP? - Page 2

Scrapper1 · #16 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 12:58pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Actually there is team control.

But your point still remains.

HA-HA!! I knew somebody would jump on that!! And actually -- I think we'll have to see the rule changes for this year.

My understanding is that they changed the definition of "team control foul" and deleted ALL the changes they made last year regarding control. So I think (I haven't seen the rulebook yet) that there is, once again, no player control or team control during a throw-in.

I knew I could bait somebody into that one

Adam · #17 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 12:58pm

Or, B1 commits a shooting foul. While the ball is in the air, B2 and A2 commit a double foul.

bainsey · #18 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Multiple Sports

Took you til 1 o'clock on this one to wake up ???????

Yup, started work five hours earlier than normal this morning. Sleep schedule a bit hazy.

APG · #19 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:05pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

HA-HA!! I knew somebody would jump on that!! And actually -- I think we'll have to see the rule changes for this year.

My understanding is that they changed the definition of "team control foul" and deleted ALL the changes they made last year regarding control. So I think (I haven't seen the rulebook yet) that there is, once again, no player control or team control during a throw-in.

I knew I could bait somebody into that one

Well...assuming NFHS doesn't change any language as it relates to double foul enforcement, we'd still handle the play the same, even if they did away with player/team control during a throw-in.

Adam · #20 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:11pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Well...assuming NFHS doesn't change any language as it relates to double foul enforcement, we'd still handle the play the same, even if they did away with player/team control during a throw-in.

True, but it would be one more of many examples of situations when there is no TC but you would not go AP on a DF. And those who insist on AP in all such situations will have one more chance to be wrong.

Raymond · #21 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:23pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hugh Refner

NF rules. Double personal foul called on A1 and B1 at the same time. Do you go to POI or AP? Thanks.

Why do you assume they are mutually exclusive?

This is right in the rule book. If whoever is having this discussion doesn't believe what's in the rule book I don't see why they would believe some dudes on the internet.

Scrapper1 · #22 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Well...assuming NFHS doesn't change any language as it relates to double foul enforcement, we'd still handle the play the same, even if they did away with player/team control during a throw-in.

Correct. But I purposely added the part about no team control, just to see who would bite

BEAREF · #23 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 01:50pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

For all double fouls, you always go to the POI. It just happens that sometimes, the AP is the POI.

I think this is the best way to interpret it...

tref · #24 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 02:01pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by BEAREF

I think this is the best way to interpret it...

Yup, we only go to the AP when POI cannot be determined & POI simply means, where would the ball be if we didnt blow our whistle.

Camron Rust · #25 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 02:27pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

Actually there is team control.

But your point still remains.

Is there really? Didn't the NFHS rewrite the rules this to not actually say there was team control and all that entails but to only say that a foul during a throwin would be considered a team control foul?

Scrapper1 · #26 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 07:16pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Is there really? Didn't the NFHS rewrite the rules this to not actually say there was team control and all that entails but to only say that a foul during a throwin would be considered a team control foul?

Uh, Camron, see post #16

APG · #27 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 07:31pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snaqwells

Or, B1 commits a shooting foul. While the ball is in the air, B2 and A2 commit a double foul.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

HA-HA!! I knew somebody would jump on that!! And actually -- I think we'll have to see the rule changes for this year.

My understanding is that they changed the definition of "team control foul" and deleted ALL the changes they made last year regarding control. So I think (I haven't seen the rulebook yet) that there is, once again, no player control or team control during a throw-in.

I knew I could bait somebody into that one

Quote:

Originally Posted by Camron Rust

Is there really? Didn't the NFHS rewrite the rules this to not actually say there was team control and all that entails but to only say that a foul during a throwin would be considered a team control foul?

Yup, I went back and saw what NFHS released.

4-19-7: A team-control foul is a common foul committed by a team that has team control (including a member of the throw-in team from the start of the throw-in until player control is obtained inbounds).
Rationale: The committee adopted a team-control rule change for last season which introduced some complications for a number of other rules. These complications were handled through interpretations last year. The addition of this parenthetical statement allows all rules affected by the team control definition change last season to revert to their previous verbiage and brings the rule in line with the interpretations that were released last year.

I'll just say, I'll believe it when I actually see it in the rule book. I don't trust NFHS with some of their editoral changes.

Scrapper1 · #28 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 07:40pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllPurposeGamer

I'll just say, I'll believe it when I actually see it in the rule book. I don't trust NFHS with some of their editoral changes.

We can absolutely agree on that. But I'm hopeful.

Adam · #29 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 08:02pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

We can absolutely agree on that. But I'm hopeful.

Me too. Frankly, the committee screwed the proverbial pooch last year. Assuming everyone would get the memo was, in my experience, a stretch worthy of the Armstrong name.

Camron Rust · #30 (**permalink**) Tue Jul 31, 2012, 08:24pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scrapper1

Uh, Camron, see post #16

I was responding to post #13. I read threads linearly and posted a reply to that post before I ever got to your post. Sometimes, when the reply might not be short, I scan the rest of the thread to see if there is a similar comment but if it is short, I don't waste my time.