throw-in
 

T/F During a throw-in, B1 has violated if thrower A1 passes the ball into the court and it is first touched by B1 who has one foot on a boundary line.

Thinking true but this is not a throw-in violation merely an OOB violation.

Why does it matter which it is? It's still true.

Going through the test, and some of the questions seem to make me think because I am not on the court. Know how to administer the rule.

Again, what does it matter what type of violation it is? It's still a violation so the answer is true.

The difference
 

The difference could be the throw in spot location and whether or not the thrower in can run the end line.
If considered a throw in violation, reset the original throw in conditions. If just OOB, designated spot would be in effect and possibly in a new location.

None of which makes a difference when the two choices are true or false.

Answering your question
 

I was answering your question as to what difference it makes... and I agree that is doesn't change the T/F answer.

??

A throw in violation on B?

Maybe not, but trying to understand more than just T/F is certainly admirable.

That has nothing to do with whether an exam question is True or False.

Also, if the original throw in in the OP is an AP throw in, does the arrow change or stay the same?

Misty Water Color Memories ...
 

Maybe the test is trying to confuse old timers. This used to be a throwin violation on A1.

That's my observation on the possible rationale behind this test question.

For those who would like a shorter, Twitter (less than 140 characters) version of the answer: True.

When was this ever a violation by A? Rule reference please?

... Of The Way We Were ...
 

Yes, about twenty-five, or thirty years, ago. The throwin violation was for A1 not throwing the ball directly to a player on the court. Team B would then get possession with a new throwin at the spot of the original throwin. It's true. It's true.

I'll let Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. climb up the stairs into his cold, attic, library to get the proper citations.

I hope he does. I've been watching basketball since 1970 and officiating it since 1985 and I don't ever recall that being the rule.

Me thinks you didn't know the rules twenty-five or thirty years ago. :D

I'll Have to Find My Glasses Also, This May Take Some Time ...
 

What? You're questioning my ability to remember an obscure fact from twenty-five years ago? Just wait until I find my car keys, because then I'll drive over to your house, in the left lane, with my left turn signal operating the entire trip, and punch you in the nose.

Unfortunately, the rule books in my library only go back as far as 1996-97, so we may have to wait for Mark T. DeNucci, Sr. to mosey on by to get his input on this ancient rule reference.

Furthermore ...
 

Now that I've given this some thought, I believe that this may have not actually been a rule, but rather, an ancient, now extinct, casebook play interpretation. An interpretation similar to the way we now interpret the play when thrower-in-er A1 throws the ball completely out of bounds without the ball touching any player on, or off, the court. Now, and back then, this is, and was, not an out of bounds violation, but rather, a throwin violation, with the ball awarded the Team B at the spot of the original throwin, not at the spot where the ball goes out of bounds.

BktBallRef: I apologize for threatening to punch you in the nose. I woke in a crotchety, cranky, ill tempered, mood this morning, like the mood that I wake up in every morning. Now that I've yelled at the neighborhood kids to get off my lawn, I'm in a much better mood.

Excellent question...I don't have an answer for you yet.

The arrow changes when the ball is touched legally in bounds. That never happened, so the arrow shouldn't change.

B being out of bounds, imm, is no different than first touching the ball by kicking it. Not a legal touch, so A's subsequent throw in is for the B violation, and A would keep the arrow.

The arrow would switch. The throw-in ends when the passed ball touches or is touched by another player out of bounds.

4-42-5b

Good to know!

So B can benefit by playing outside the lines. Interesting.

A had their chance to make a an AP throwin.

What's the benefit?

Half a possession.

There is no benefit. The violation carries its own penalty. The AP throw-in is over. The out of bounds violation is totally different than a kick, which is a deliberate, illegal act.

That would be a benefit if we also called it a throw-in violation on A and gave B the ball and the arrow.

And maybe even if we wnet back to the original spot and gave the ball to A.

But since we're giving the ball to A at the spot where B touched it OOB, then it's not different from B tipping the ball and causing it to go OOB.