Foul During AP Throw-In
 

At a Varsity boys game last night near the end of a close
game there was a held ball tie up which resulted in an AP throw-in. After the official handed the ball to A1, A2 was fouled before A1 ever released the ball. The officials met at the table and changed the arrow to team B. I thought under 4-42-5 that the throw-in does not end until the ball is legally touched, therefore the arrow should have stayed with team A. Am I correct?? The official said that the throw-in ended when he hands the ball to the thrower.

Really shouldn't get this wrong in a varsity game...
 

4-42

ART. 5

The throw-in ends when:

a. The passed ball touches or is legally touched by another player inbounds.

b. The passed ball touches or is touched by another player out of bounds, except as in 7-5-7.

c. The throw-in team commits a throw-in violation.


6-4

ART. 4

The direction of the possession arrow is reversed immediately after an alternating-possession throw-in ends. An alternating-possession throw-in ends when the throw-in ends as in 4-42-5.

I hope this was a regular season game, and that this official will not be working any postseason games.

TI ends when legally touched or the throw-in team violates. And if Team A had committed the foul, the arrow also would have stayed with A.

So you are right.

It was for the conference championship and there was not another AP throw-in so it did not affect the outcome of the game, but it sure could have.

I'm out of that hope.

I thought if A committed a violation on their throw-in that they indeed would lose the arrow. Would this be the applicable case play?

6.4.5 SITUATION A:

Team A is awarded the ball for a throw-in under the alternating procedure. A1 commits a violation.


RULING: B's ball for a throw-in because of the violation. In addition, the possession arrow is reversed and is pointed towards B's basket. Team B will have the next throw-in opportunity under the alternating *procedure. Team A has lost its opportunity by virtue of the violation. A violation by Team A during an alternating-possession throw-in is the only way a team loses its turn under the procedure.

COMMENT: If a foul by either team occurs before an alternating-possession throw-in ends, the foul is penalized as required and play continues as it *normally would, but the possession arrow is not reversed. The same team will still have the arrow for the next alternating-possession throw-in. The arrow is reversed when an alternating-possession throw-in ends. (6-4-4)

*******************************************

EDITED TO ADD: Never mind, violation <> foul. Doh.

I'm not sure if this was added later or not, but what it prevents is team A getting a throw in via AP arrow with 1.3 secs left in a quarter and then just taking a 5 sec so they can try and start the next quarter with the ball. You can imagine the disaster that would lead to...

I am impressed the official was able to say this with a straight face. :eek:

Conference championship game and this guy is the best official the assignor can come up with? I too would be out of hope if this happened in any of the leagues I work in.

You are correct. He's a moron.

I think disaster would be a bit strong for this.

This same thing happened earlier this year to me, except Team A committed a team control foul.

The R on the game wanted to change the arrow, I told him it remains because the throw end didn't end. For some reason my partner didn't believe me and asked my other partner...who told him it should be reversed :eek:

At this point, he decides he does believe me and leaves the arrow the same. We discussed after the game and I showed them the rules that govern the ruling.

My 2 partners are well respected and good play callers. I would work any game with them, but I just know I better brush up on my rules before we do :D

We could go an entire season without having to really know some of the more detailed rules of the game.

Or something could happen right in front of us the next play that requires us to recall a rule.

Thing that drove this home for me was at an association meeting earlier this season when a lot of people didn't really know the rules regarding players leaving the bench and participating or not participating in a fight. I think maybe 1 person in the room had had a bench-clearing fight situation in the past and it was years prior.

So I started thinking about it -- wouldn't that be the absolute worst time for you to have to worry about not knowing the rules or the penalty application -- just after there was a bench-clearing situation?

This one should be easy for a varsity crew, but the OP proves that it wasn't - at least for that one.

The disaster I was implying was the teams holding for 5 sec violations back and forth and back and forth...

Rich, I understand what you are saying. I agree, things like the fight rules that might only happen once in a career could be tough to know. Granted a foul by the throw in team doesn't occur often, but there are multiple throw ins every game. There is no excuse to not know when a throw in ends. I would put this in the basic knowledge category.

It's when an AP throw-in ends, though. And 95%+ of them end when the ball's touched on the floor.

This could happen if the rule has no exceptions. Is there an exception?:confused:

He's suggesting a what-if scenario. As in, what if the rule were different than it is now?

As it is now, a 5 second violation causes the arrow to switch.

There is still a way for team A to avoid being forced to consume the arrow as in his scenario....

A1, making an AP throwin, could throw the ball to A2 who kicks the ball. It is not a throw-in violation and the arrow doesn't switch due to the throwin not being legally touched.

B's ball for the kicking violation. Time Expires. A gets the throwin to start the next quarter.

Is it a throw in violation that switches it? Or is it a violation by the throw in team? (My book is at home, I am not.)

Wouldn't happen. If A commits a 5 second violation (under your hypothetical situation where the arrow did not change following a throw in violation), B's ensuing throw in would not be an AP throw in, so B would have no incentive to do the same thing.

Fellas I was just responding to an early comment/question about the violation switching the arrow, stating the reason they may have added the exception was to avoid a scenario where A took the violation to get the ball to start the next half--and then making a joke about them violating back and forth. However, you are correct Adam and found a flaw in my hypothetical loop hole-well played.

Per the wording of the rule and case book play it is a violation by the throw-in team. I take that to mean any violation.

6-4-5
The opportunity to make an alternating-possession throw-in is lost if the throw-in team violates. If either team fouls during an alternating-possession throw-in, it does not cause the throw-in team to lose the possession arrow. If an opponent commits a violation during the throw-in, the possession arrow is postponed.

6.4.5 SITUATION A:

Team A is awarded the ball for a throw-in under the alternating procedure. A1 commits a violation.

RULING: B's ball for a throw-in because of the violation. In addition, the possession arrow is reversed and is pointed towards B's basket. Team B will have the next throw-in opportunity under the alternating *procedure. Team A has lost its opportunity by virtue of the violation. A violation by Team A during an alternating-possession throw-in is the only way a team loses its turn under the procedure.

COMMENT: If a foul by either team occurs before an alternating-possession throw-in ends, the foul is penalized as required and play continues as it *normally would, but the possession arrow is not reversed. The same team will still have the arrow for the next alternating-possession throw-in. The arrow is reversed when an alternating-possession throw-in ends. (6-4-4)

Not true. Any violation by the throwing team DURING the throw-in results in the AP arrow switching.
However, you are right that there is a way to preserve the arrow for later, if the team so desires--simply foul during the throw-in!

It would be a good time for a Book T if one was coming anyway.

True, but that would result in giving up FTs.
Here is what I had in mind: A held ball is called with 0.2 seconds remaining in the 2nd quarter. Team A has the arrow and throw-in would be from near the division line. Team A only has five team fouls. A smart coaching move would be to put in a sub from the end of the bench and have him foul an opponent during the throw-in. Team A would then keep the arrow for the start of the 3rd qtr and Team B could only score on a tap on the final possession of the 2nd qtr.

Great strategy, but it would require A12 to know how to foul here. A bad screen would be perfect. Then of course make sure the officials know the rule.

I also just realized that it would be a team control foul, so this could even be done with Team A having already committed 10 fouls in the first half.
Too many years under the old "neither team is in control during a throw-in" fundamental.

You are correct. I was looking at ART 4 of the AP rule that is about reversing the arrow when the throwin ends (which then refers to 4-42-5 about how a throwin ends) but ART 5 covers all violations.


The fouling case is not a freebie as it counts toward the team fouls. In most games, a foul at the end of the quarter (1st and 3rd) would likely be before the bonus and it would probably resulting in giving the other team bonus FTs sooner than they would have received them. Is a possession worth 2 FTs (on a later foul)?

I guess their only resort might be to entice the other team into some sort of infraction.

He could simply push the defender away in order to get open. Couldn't he?

What about in the scenario Nevadaref brought up, when it's done before halftime? In that case the team fouls go back to zero to start the 3rd quarter/2nd half.

Sure, but how many times do kids get stupid when told to foul?

Kids get stupid? Come on, that wouldn't happen. :rolleyes: