Why isn't throw in spot after a "T" POI...?

[bob jenkins]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

Team A misses both free throws (but thats not the point)

Now Team A has to take the ball out at half court instead of under the basket where the originally would have.

I can't come up with a play where "two FTs plus the ball back at mid court" is worth less than "no FTs and the ball at the original spot." So, while the penalty might not be as advantageous as it would be if the ball was at the original spot, it's not exactly a loss for Team A.

[Dixon21]

Originally Posted by bob jenkins

I can't come up with a play where "two FTs plus the ball back at mid court" is worth less than "no FTs and the ball at the original spot." So, while the penalty might not be as advantageous as it would be if the ball was at the original spot, it's not exactly a loss for Team A.

this makes zero sense.....

I am simply saying take the moving of the throw in spot out of the equation.....the two free throws and the ball should be the only "award" for the T.....moving the throw in spot should not be part of it....the throw in spot should not put either team at an advantage or disadvantage.....leave it the heck alone......

[Triad zebra]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

this makes zero sense.....

I am simply saying take the moving of the throw in spot out of the equation.....the two free throws and the ball should be the only "award" for the T.....moving the throw in spot should not be part of it....the throw in spot should not put either team at an advantage or disadvantage.....leave it the heck alone......

Dixon you need to think about what your saying as you rest your brain tonight. This is just your opinion and no one else is agreeing. And because we don't agree doesn't make your opinion wrong. My opinion is they should award the team 5 points and run the clock to zero, but I don't believe anyone else would agree with me so I don't bring it up. I have read this forum on an extremely regular basis for the past 10 years and I assure you these guys are here to help with any rules questions or interpretations. Don't let your first experience cloud your judgement of the members.

[Dixon21]

Originally Posted by Triad zebra

Dixon you need to think about what your saying as you rest your brain tonight. This is just your opinion and no one else is agreeing. And because we don't agree doesn't make your opinion wrong. My opinion is they should award the team 5 points and run the clock to zero, but I don't believe anyone else would agree with me so I don't bring it up. I have read this forum on an extremely regular basis for the past 10 years and I assure you these guys are here to help with any rules questions or interpretations. Don't let your first experience cloud your judgement of the members.

I believe it is just a matter of time before we see the change....like many others that have trickled down from the upper levels......

I could really give a rats butt, this is just discussion/debate for me......others seem to be bothered by that.....I had a situation happen in a game and it just didn't "feel right" to me.....so I brought it up......no big deal

[Adam]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

I believe it is just a matter of time before we see the change....like many others that have trickled down from the upper levels......

I could really give a rats butt, this is just discussion/debate for me......others seem to be bothered by that.....I had a situation happen in a game and it just didn't "feel right" to me.....so I brought it up......no big deal

How would this be coming from upper levels? There is no level who does it as you suggest. None.

Let's move the situation. A1 scores to go up by 1 with 3 seconds left and gets a T for taunting (assume he earned it). Would you rather have B take their shots and then head back down to the other end for the end line throw in?

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

...

I saw this "cost" a team in a game I was officiating.....

3 seconds left if plenty of time to run a play that originates from the division line. A throw-in from the offensive end line probably would have been passed out to the 28' line anyway.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

Why are we still doing this?

Because at the HS level I believe the NF wants to make these actions more punitive. It is that simple from my point of view. The purpose of sports in other levels is not the same at the HS level.

Peace

[Welpe]

It's times like this I really miss Jurassic.

[Dixon21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

Because at the HS level I believe the NF wants to make these actions more punitive. It is that simple from my point of view. The purpose of sports in other levels is not the same at the HS level.

Peace

did you not read the initial post/situation....in this situation who got "punished" by moving the ball to half court.....it sure as heck wasn't the team that got the T.....

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

did you not read the initial post/situation....in this situation who got "punished" by moving the ball to half court.....it sure as heck wasn't the team that got the T.....

The punitive action is giving the ball to the team that was offended. Not to possibly give it to the team that caused the T in the first place. You got the ball, what is the problem? Putting in the ball under the basket does not necessarily make you have a better advantage. There are 3 seconds on the clock, not .3 seconds on the clock. That is plenty of time to shoot the ball from another position where under the basket you might not get a good look at all.

Again, this is not our problem. Because if the T was given to the team that was called for the FT and you give them the ball under their basket, some would say that was not right either. It is all about perspective.

Peace

[Raymond]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The punitive action is giving the ball to the team that was offended. Not to possibly give it to the team that caused the T in the first place. You got the ball, what is the problem? Putting in the ball under the basket does not necessarily make you have a better advantage. There are 3 seconds on the clock, not .3 seconds on the clock. That is plenty of time to shoot the ball from another position where under the basket you might not get a good look at all.

Again, this is not our problem. Because if the T was given to the team that was called for the FT and you give them the ball under their basket, some would say that was not right either. It is all about perspective.

Peace

As a coach, I'd rather diagram a play from the division line than from underneath my basket. I would feel I could better utilize the spacing on the court.

I rarely see any plays where the PG runs down to the end line and yells "Motion!!!"

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by BadNewsRef

As a coach, I'd rather diagram a play from the division line than from underneath my basket. I would feel I could better utilize the spacing on the court.

I rarely see any plays where the PG runs down to the end line and yells "Motion!!!"

Three seconds is a lot of time from the to ball being inbounded at the division line. Actually unless you can get the pass directly in the lane area, then you are making a possible bad pass or you are not going to get time to make a couple of passes to get the shot off in time. The division line at least gives you a chance to get someone up in a spot to take a decent shot. But I get your point. I just see plays work better in that situation away from the basket unless the defense completely misses an assignment, which usually does not happen that badly.

Peace

[Dixon21]

Originally Posted by JRutledge

The punitive action is giving the ball to the team that was offended. Not to possibly give it to the team that caused the T in the first place. You got the ball, what is the problem? Putting in the ball under the basket does not necessarily make you have a better advantage. There are 3 seconds on the clock, not .3 seconds on the clock. That is plenty of time to shoot the ball from another position where under the basket you might not get a good look at all.

Again, this is not our problem. Because if the T was given to the team that was called for the FT and you give them the ball under their basket, some would say that was not right either. It is all about perspective.

Peace

the team that was offended already had the ball....and they were going to keep it and throw it in under the basket.....then there was a T and their throw in spot got moved to half court....if you or anybody else in here doesn't think that is a disadvantage I don't know what else to say....

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

if you or anybody else in here doesn't think that is a disadvantage I don't know what else to say....

Why am I supposed to care? My job is to officiate the game according to the rules, not ensure everyone has a fair experience.

[JRutledge]

Originally Posted by Dixon21

the team that was offended already had the ball....and they were going to keep it and throw it in under the basket.....then there was a T and their throw in spot got moved to half court....if you or anybody else in here doesn't think that is a disadvantage I don't know what else to say....

I am aware of the who had the ball. My point is that it was not a tragic situation. The NBA runs plays all the time from half court and you see a spectacular play. Closer is not always better. But if that is the worst you have to complain about, that is not the rules makers problem. Because the alternative is to possibly give the ball to the other team and you get no shot at winning the game. At least you still had a chance in this specific situation.

Peace